John Coleman, founder of the weather Channel and now at KUSI-TV in San Diego passes on this video which I’m passing on to WUWT readers.
John Coleman on the recent solar slump announcement
- Thursday, February 5, 2026
John Coleman, founder of the weather Channel and now at KUSI-TV in San Diego passes on this video which I’m passing on to WUWT readers.
Higley7 says ‘If the known cyclical factors of the Sun, from the ~11 year solar cycle to the 70, 200, and 600 year patterns and run them at the same time, they create an interference pattern which nicely recreates the solar cycle sunspot numbers from the Maunder Minimum all the way up to today’s solar cycle 24. Following the interference pattern forward, we see, oh, another Maunder Minimum for the next two cycles. Fancy that! No computer model needed, just examination of history and detectable patterns. The prediction here is NOT one of many possible outcomes; it is the most likely outcome, however.’
Possibly – but one must remember that this is the sort of data-mining that the Met Office has always used to try to ‘predict’ what the next year’s summer is going to be like – and we all know how well that has turned out. Without good, comprehensive theories to explain (quantitatively and qualitatively) such apparent trends, that is all they are – apparent!
This might convince the ‘it’s CO2’ nuts to the fact that the sun drives climate.
Ian E, Using previous cycles to predict future cycles has been the method utilised by many long range weather forecasters particularly here in Australia. I think here because our weather is so unpredictable. The fact that the cycle forecasters have a better record than the whiz kids and their computers says a lot for using history to forecast the future. The whiz kids nowadays have so many parameters dependent on AGW they are doomed to fail and most often do.
Whether this solar Grand Minimum causes another Maunder type event we will only know at natures leisure. I just hope science is prepared to have pet theories trashed or corrobarated and hope it is honest enough to accept the facts.
TheTempestSpark says:
June 16, 2011 at 6:09 pm
I think “announcment” is spelt wrong, is there not an “e” in announcement. 🙂
The end of the world is nigh, everyone is running around panicking like head less chickens and all your worried about is if there is an e in announcement.
Yes your right there is.
Ooh . . . so it might get cooler, or warmer. Who knows?
X (MMCO2)+Y (Solar influence)+ Z ( all the stuff we don’t know)= Unknowable variable called weather.
That should do it.
Aparicia quotes a warmista:
“My worry would be a global cooling, if it occurs, would mean people turn up their central heating, drive more as they dont like going out in the cold etc and thus use more fossil fuels and consequently increase global warming.”
If warming can cause cooling, then why not cooling producing warming?
Doesn’t worry me at all. I’ve semi-retired in Thailand. Pig farm and all. As a side benefit I will not have to chill my beer, just leave it out in the sun. ….
As a serious aside. Maybe that is why Al Gore has “beefed” up. He is storing insulation in preparation. :-))
regards
Lucky we have cheap electricity and genetically modified cold resistant crops.
SteveSadlov says:
June 16, 2011 at 8:27 pm
I hate to break it to ya, but we ARE colonizing space–our little spaceship is called planet Earth. But here’s the stickler: If conditions on Earth are so formidable that we as the human race don’t survive, what leads you to believe that colonizing space outside of Earth is going to be as good as or better than our current surroundings? I don’t know of any planet in the Solar System I’d care to live on (I tend to enjoy walking around unfettered with a breathing apparatus, space suit, etc. even if I might have to wear a coat and mukluks) and I don’t think I’d like to strike out to another planet so distant only my grandchildren might (emphasis on the “might”) survive to their destination. (They’d likely find out that the star powering that planetary system is rather variable, too.) No, we’re likely living on the most hospitable space vehicle imaginable, albeit not a perfect one.
Ian E says:
June 17, 2011 at 1:09 am
I disagree. The Met Office uses a big, fancy, expensive supercomputer with all algorithms set to “warm” when predicting weather.
10 years ago we weren’t converting 30% of our corn crop into auto fuel.
For crying out loud, we have so much agriculture that we are still paying farmers to not farm. We have millions of acres that have been allowed to go fallow because they couldn’t compete with the wide open midwest farms.
Even if we have a full blown Little Ice Age, there will be no mass starvation. Food prices will go up, and we might have to eat more grain and less meat. But that will be the extent of it.
@Amino Acids in Meteorites (June 16, 2011 at 10:30 pm)
That video delivers an interesting twist.
““This is highly unusual and unexpected,” Dr. Frank Hill, associate director of the NSO’s Solar Synoptic Network […]”
So often we see “experts” cutting their own legs right out from under themselves like this [“This is highly unusual and unexpected”] when issuing science press releases.
Large orbital mirrors should help keep us warm…
I don’t think you can blame poor quality of life during the middle ages on weather. As it is today, political instability kills. 12-1300 marks the rise of the nation state. I take issue with the idea that 1300-1500 was the worst time in European history. The feudal era prior to this time was much more uncertain, brutal and violent. Communities were unable to protect themselves from marauders and suffered constantly under them. Many towns were sacked yearly by Vikings and for hundreds of years every city, town and village along any waterway throughout Europe were subject to violent raids.
The Rise of nation states brought stability and relative peace to Europe and trade expanded rapidly. There were numerous technological innovations in farming, husbandry and science. If The devastation of the great plague and smaller plague events that followed can be blamed on low global temperatures then I suppose a case can be made, but even the great population reduction has some positive social outcomes; labor became much more valuable and wealthy landowners now had to compete for labor.
They adapted then and we will adapt to whatever climate we find ourselves in. We should be concentrating on providing ourselves with government that encourages growth and innovation (and one that doesn’t wreck our economic foundations for God’s sake!) We don’t need to hold up on our homes with guns and ammo, we need to keep the pressure on our representatives to reign in government spending, reduce regulation that retards innovation and growth and finally promote policies that will provide affordable energy to drive it all.
I think the tide is turning.
Well, nuts. Now we have to build a fence on the Canadian border.
It is worth saying again. The science behind climate change is not settled in any material way. This is a very vivid illustration. Fighting fire with ice.
At least this possibility has some historical record of correlation in support rather than in contravention (of C02 induced warming). And if warmists and government healthcare advocates get their way in shutting down energy production, economic activity and rationing healthcare resources, old people would be at risk.
Hey Coach Springer, you made me chuckle. Can we let Steve M. In before the fence goes up?
Cassie King says:
June 16, 2011 at 11:38 pm
“ . . . remember me.
Unless you tell us something useful you are beginning to sound like Harold Camping and his end times predictions (note the plural) – and will be remembered similarly. I asked for details and you repeated your historical trek. Information, please?
The Maunder Minimum occurred during a larger period of cooling, we’re coming off of a period of warming. So, I don’t expect it to be as bad as Maunder, but I do expect it to be worse than the cooling phase that ended in the 1970s.
Reading these comments, it appears to me that many have not learned from the past, and will suffer the consequent condemnation. I’ll leave you to determine if you are among those to whom I refer.
Our agricultural success has come at a very steep price to the long term viability of the soils and aquifers underpinning that success. The soil depth in the Great Plains are now a small fraction of what they were when they first came under tillage. Consumption of water from the Oglala and other aquifers has severely depleted them, and the recharge rates cannot meet the future needs, especially in the event of mulit-decadal droughts typical of colder climatic conditions. The biofuels emphasis upon using grain crops requiring tillage of these depleted soils accelerates their reduction and threatens their continued viability for food production in the coming decades. At some point, someone is going to need to find a means of reversing the depletions and restoring the soi.ls and soil depths while maintaining critical agricultural production. No till crops and fallow land conservation is helping, but the massive addition of organic matter will ultimately be needed to recreate the lost soils.
The odds of going into a Maunder Minimum (MM) are extremely low I would say based on the basic math. Radiative forcing during the period surrounding the MM were relatively small, so when the sunspot activity dropped we lost likely around have the signal strength which is around 0.2 W/m2 in total variance (0.1 W/m2 in relative change). Since we are currently estimated around 1.66 W/m2 a quite sun will only reducing climate forcing by 0.1 W/m2 which equals 1.56 W/m2 positive forcing all in.
Unfortunately, we will continue to warm.