New paper suggests sun may be headed for a Maunder minimum

Just published in GRL, a new paper by Lockwood et al that suggests the sun may be headed for a Maunder type minimum.:

The persistence of solar activity indicators and the descent of the Sun into Maunder Minimum conditions

Key Points

• Can we predict the onset of the next grand solar minimum
• Grand minima can be predicted using some solar indices
• The design and operation of systems influenced by space climate can be optimised

Abstract:

The recent low and prolonged minimum of the solar cycle, along with the slow growth in activity of the new cycle, has led to suggestions that the Sun is entering a Grand Solar Minimum (GSMi), potentially as deep as the Maunder Minimum (MM). This raises questions about the persistence and predictability of solar activity. We study the autocorrelation functions and predictability R2L(t) of solar indices, particularly group sunspot number RG and heliospheric modulation potential Φ for which we have data during the descent into the MM. For RG and Φ, R2L(t) > 0.5 for times into the future of t 4 and 3 solar cycles, respectively: sufficient to allow prediction of a GSMi onset. The lower predictability of sunspot number RZ is discussed. The current declines in peak and mean RG are the largest since the onset of the MM and exceed those around 1800 which failed to initiate a GSMi.

189 thoughts on “New paper suggests sun may be headed for a Maunder minimum”

1. Good job I am planning to move to the tropics next year. This summer in Sydney is a complete washout. 7 or 8 degrees C below the historical average max this coming week, and that is the trend, despite a few warmish days. I’m off to Mackay for Christmas and inland for new year, just to try to keep warm this summer.

2. Latitude says:

Can we predict the onset of the next grand solar minimum
====================
……….. no

3. John Marshall says:

To extend any graph that varies as the one above is problematic. There is no guarantee that the next leg of the graph won’t jump upwards. But there have been other indicators that might indicate that the future guess from the graph could be right. A Maunder Minimum would certainly kill AGW dead in its tracks.

4. Alex the skeptic says:

Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Hey Rossi, get that e-cat going. We need it for the next 500 years of cooling.

5. jack morrow says:

Is this the same Lockwood that was mostly wrong on his other predictions? I have no faith any more in the model predictions by these guys.

6. John-X says:

“The current declines in peak and mean RG are the largest since the onset of the MM and exceed those around 1800 which failed to initiate a GSMi.”
So the Dalton Minimum wasn’t very grand.

7. Sean Peake says:

I expect Leif to be here in 3, 2,…

8. Latitude says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:08 am (Edit)
Can we predict the onset of the next grand solar minimum
====================
……….. no

Speak for yourself..

9. Dr. Lurtz says:

WOW…. The Sun may be a variable Star!?!? But we need to carefully define the word “Variable”. It appears that visible light is relatively constant [the basis for the TSI measurement]; the UV and other frequencies of energy are wildly [10 times UV swing] variable.
As per my previous posts, don’t look at the Sunspot number for what effects the Earth’s Weather. Instead, look at the 10.7 cm Flux. This measures the UV energy which directly effects the heat in the Ozone Layer. This is the thermal blanket that helps us become warm or cold.
The “UV effects” are the cause of the disparity between the “TSI” measurement and the effects of the the “TSI” on our Climate.
We will just need to wait for the rest of the Solar and Climate Community to catch-up.

10. heatrayguy says:

11. kbray in california says:

Santa Anna says it’s cooling too…
Since reports in 2008/9 indicated AG-warming would reduce Santa Anna winds….
here…
http://www.achangeinthewind.com/2008/10/good-news-friday-global-warming-lessening-santa-ana-wind-conditions.html
and here too….
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/…/CEC-500-2009-015-D.PDF
Therefore the current powerful Santa Anna winds must be a confirmation of Global Cooling !!
That’s cool.

12. There is clearly a strong subconscious urge on the part of many scientists today to put forth “dire” predictions, and for the media and/or the public to want to hear such–it’s the science version of “reality TV”, where the cast is over the top rather than just ordinary folks (and the favorite performers especially so–we might call this episode, “Snooky Finds the Sun in Bed, After a Late Night–And Goes Nuts”). Apparently, dire predictions are to these scientists and their readers what teasingly-unclad ladies are to mass market advertising–irresistible. Apparently the current generation is bored with a tired old Earth, and a Sun under which nothing is new. Can’t anyone else see we are dealing in such cases as this with bored children, rather than master scientists? When they grow up and get back to respecting the Standard Atmosphere (which my Venus/Earth comparison confirmed as the fundamental and stable atmospheric reality) rather than visions of runaway or meter-pegging climate, I will begin to take climate scientists seriously.

13. ob says:

thank you mr./ms. jmrsudbury

14. If Leif is coming in, are we still on the trend line for contrast and magnetic strength of sunspots from Livingston and Penn?

15. Pamela Gray says:

It didn’t take long to hear the drum of “it’s the Sun”. Reminds me of Trenbreth’s hurricane nonsense before the research was in and convincingly showed that he was wrong. Solar influence on terra firma temperature anomalies must rise above the background natural weather pattern variation short and long term oscillations. In other words, the affects of UV on the ozone layer must somehow perculate down to the weather level and force change in oceanic teleconnections on atmospheric natural weather pattern variations in measurable ways. Sorry. Not enough energy. Clearing out one pressure system for another and sustaining it takes, for lack of a better word, Hercules’ strength.
I would rather we get back to the Sun and whether or not this paper demonstrates new understandings of Solar prediction efforts.

16. Gary Mount says:

I was wondering why 1939 kept coming up in my local weather broadcasts as having the hottest day on record for that day, now I know why. (UHI not a big factor at the Vancouver airport this time of year here).

17. Pamela Gray says:
December 2, 2011 at 7:14 am
Solar influence on terra firma temperature anomalies must rise above the background natural weather pattern variation short and long term oscillations. In other words, the affects of UV on the ozone layer must somehow perculate down to the weather level and force change in oceanic teleconnections on atmospheric natural weather pattern variations in measurable ways. Sorry. Not enough energy. Clearing out one pressure system for another and sustaining it takes, for lack of a better word, Hercules’ strength.

You’re a nice person, but you haven’t a clue about the way in which solar variability affects climate, which it does, at all timecscales.

18. Alan the Brit says:

jack morrow says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:18 am
Is this the same Lockwood that was mostly wrong on his other predictions? I have no faith any more in the model predictions by these guys.
I suspect this is he, Prof Mike Lockwood, who when interviewed a little while ago – 09/10 I think, said on record rather dismissively, that if the quiet Sun was going to have an effet on temperatures we would have seen by it now! Or words to that effect. The guy has even been on The Sky at Night with Sir Patrick Moore, he’s lost all credibility in my view, he’s sold out too many times to the AGW brigade!

19. David Y says:

re: Tallbloke…
A little less condescension, please? How does your snarky comment re Pamela help this conversation?

20. Pamela Gray says:

Tallbloke, you are absolutely correct. I haven’t a clue. Especially the variability part getting through our thick soup to such a degree that it smacks me in the face with something like, “Man oh man the Sun is quiet today. Must wear my fur coat instead of the stadium jacket.”
I suppose you are ready to tell me to never mind the descrepancy between our cold Pacific Ocean anomaly not matching the teeny tiny change in IR between a busy and a quiet Sun, or the power of eastern trade winds to blow warm water away not matching the teeny tiny power of UV variation on those trades.
Yep. I be clueless.

21. crosspatch says:

In other words, the affects of UV on the ozone layer must somehow perculate down to the weather level and force change in oceanic teleconnections on atmospheric natural weather pattern variations in measurable ways.

Well, it just so happens:

Solar forcing of winter climate variability in the Northern Hemisphere
Sarah Ineson,
Jeff R. Knight,
James C. Manners,
Nick J. Dunstone,
Lesley J. Gray
& Joanna D. Haigh
An influence of solar irradiance variations on Earth’s surface climate has been repeatedly suggested, based on correlations between solar variability and meteorological variables. Specifically, weaker westerly winds have been observed in winters with a less active sun, for example at the minimum phase of the 11-year sunspot cycle. With some possible exceptions, it has proved difficult for climate models to consistently reproduce this signal. Spectral Irradiance Monitor satellite measurements indicate that variations in solar ultraviolet irradiance may be larger than previously thought. Here we drive an ocean–atmosphere climate model with ultraviolet irradiance variations based on these observations. We find that the model responds to the solar minimum with patterns in surface pressure and temperature that resemble the negative phase of the North Atlantic or Arctic Oscillation, of similar magnitude to observations. In our model, the anomalies descend through the depth of the extratropical winter atmosphere. If the updated measurements of solar ultraviolet irradiance are correct, low solar activity, as observed during recent years, drives cold winters in northern Europe and the United States, and mild winters over southern Europe and Canada, with little direct change in globally averaged temperature. Given the quasiregularity of the 11-year solar cycle, our findings may help improve decadal climate predictions for highly populated extratropical regions.

http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v4/n11/full/ngeo1282.html

22. DirkH says:

Pamela Gray says:
December 2, 2011 at 7:14 am
“Not enough energy. Clearing out one pressure system for another and sustaining it takes, for lack of a better word, Hercules’ strength.”
Pamela, if changes in the Solar spectrum (variation in UV output) and/or changes in the Solar magnetic field have an effect on cloudiness, modulating it by a percent or two, you suddenly get the necessary change in energy.

23. ferd berple says:

Dr. Lurtz says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:28 am
Instead, look at the 10.7 cm Flux. This measures the UV energy which directly effects the heat in the Ozone Layer.
Isn’t 10cm UHF? Isn’t UV 100nm? A million times more energy per photon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Light_spectrum.svg
We all know that hairspray is what drives the Ozone layer. Climate \$cientists have told us this for years and they would know. That is why they created the Montreal Protocol, so that Dupont could continue to get royalties on a new refrigerant, once their patent on Freon expired. The Montreal Protocol made it illegal to make use of Dupont’s Freon patent once it expired. Instead you had to pay royalties on Dupont’s new patent.
\$cience in action.

24. ferd berple says:

DirkH says:
December 2, 2011 at 7:53 am
changes in the Solar magnetic field have an effect on cloudiness, modulating it by a percent or two, you suddenly get the necessary change in energy.
UV varies as much as 15% during the solar cycle. Something Climate Science and Solar Science has not accounted for. The Temperature of the earth is about 300K. A 15% change is about 45C. And we are set to end industrialization and condemn most of the world to poverty over 2C?

25. Richard deSousa says:

If we’re going to have a Maunder like minimum, it will be devastating for every living creature on this earth. Mass starvation, massive die out of our human and animal population as availability of food becomes scarce.

26. ferd berple says:

Correction. The aim of CO2 regulation is not to condemn the people of the earth to poverty by ending industrialization. It is to condemn the people of the earth to poverty and mass starvation by ending the industrialization that has made it possible for us to feed 7 billion people.
Look at Zimbabwe as an example of what happens when you replace industrialization with human labor. A net exporter of food becomes an importer. When this happens on a planetary scale, where do you import your food from? Mars? the Moon? Nature has a simpler solution. It eliminates the hungry until the food supply balance is restored.

27. Theo Goodwin says:

I think the key word here is ‘prediction’. I am pleased to see that the WUWT crowd is quite aware that our existing theories do not enable us to predict a solar minimum or the effects on Earth of a solar minimum.
What the scientists are doing is extrapolating from old graphs. We can call it “forecasting.”

28. Ninderthana says:

Note that my paper predicts an Oort-like minimum (1010 to 1050 A.D.) that will last from roughly 2005 to 2045, not a Maunder-like minimum.

29. John-X says:

Richard deSousa says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:05 am
“If we’re going to have a Maunder like minimum, it will be devastating for every living creature on this earth.”
We’d better give enough money to the IPCC so they can make sure that doesn’t happen.

30. crosspatch says:

People seem to think only of Dalton and Maunder. Remember that going into the LIA we had other solar minima nearly back to back. There was the Wolf minimum which was deeper and longer than Dalton but not so deep and long as Maunder. There was also the Spörer and then finally the Maunder. Prior to the MWP there was the Oort Minimum which might have been more like the Dalton.
The Spörer lasted for nearly 100 years. Sunspots had not yet been discovered so we have no exact counts to go by.

31. jack morrow says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:18 am
Is this the same Lockwood that was mostly wrong on his other predictions? I have no faith any more in the model predictions by these guys.
Is it the same Lockwood that disputes any effect of sun activity on climate, together with a Piers Forster study?
The BBC reported in 2007:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6290228.stm
Ooopsi… did I say BBC?

32. I’m a bit confused. The abstract doesn’t appear to make any predictions, but rather says it is exploring whether or not a prediction could be made. Did I miss some subtlety, or does the actual paper (which I don’t ahve access to) go on to make such a prediction and if so, what is it?

33. pat says:

So what? According to the Warmists the sun has no effect on weather or climate whatsoever. Didn’t our troll Hugh Pepper(?) say as much only 2 days ago, replete with links?

34. Paul Vaughan says:

@Pamela Gray (December 2, 2011 at 7:14 am)

35. crosspatch says:

Ninderthana says:
Note that my paper predicts an Oort-like minimum (1010 to 1050 A.D.)

Hi!
I find it more likely that we would have something less than Maunder simply because it seems that less severe cases are more common in the record and therefore seem more likely occur. To predict a “Maunder” would seem to be going to extreme. So predicting an Oort-like minimum would seem like a more reasonable expectation.

36. Sean Peake says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:24 am
I expect Leif to be here in 3, 2,…
I’m busy right now. And most of the comments are just the same old, tired sycophantic babble by the usual pushers of pseudo-science which we all have heard a million times.
Caution: use of Rg is not a good idea as it is wrong [too low by 50%] before ~1885, and the Rz is too high [by 20%] after 1945. This invalidate any detailed numerical comparisons.
That the Rg agrees better with Fs and Phi is no wonder as these were derived or calibrated against Rg in the first place. Even Ken Schatten [one of the inventors of Rg] now agrees with me that Rg is wrong [too low]. Take a look at the SSN workshop wiki at http://ssnworkshop.wikia.com/wiki/Home
and of the presentations
http://ssnworkshop.wikia.com/wiki/Presentations_1

37. crosspatch says:

How does TSI vary during a solar event like that?

Total output doesn’t really vary all that much but what DOES vary is the energy distribution in the spectrum. I think we are going to find that energy changes in the UV portion of the spectrum have a larger change than we have previously thought they have but that is speculation on my part. Of particular interest to me are long-term impacts of reduced UV on ocean temperatures. If we were to go 100 years with reduced UV, what impact does that have on the ocean? UV penetrates the deepest of all the wavelengths and is very energetic.
Also, what impact does reduced UV have on biological life on Earth? Sunlight is a natural anti-microbial due to UV. If we have reduced UV, do we see greater microbial abundance in soil and at the surface of the oceans? What would be the impact of that on things such as decay, diseases, food chain, etc?
To my mind there are more interesting things to be known about the distribution of the energy in the spectrum than the total power of the aggregate spectrum which I don’t believe changes all that much.

38. Gail Combs says:

Richard deSousa says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:05 am
If we’re going to have a Maunder like minimum, it will be devastating for every living creature on this earth. Mass starvation, massive die out of our human and animal population as availability of food becomes scarce.
_____________________________________
DO NOT make the mistake of think our fearless leaders actually believe the crap science they are feeding to the rest of us for political reasons.

Barton Biggs: Stock A Safe Haven With Food And Firearms…
….Morgan Stanley research guru turned hedge fund manager Barton Biggs (pictured), who called the market rally, advises that you buy a farm a good distance away from a city and, he advises, make sure that your doomsday safe-haven:
* Be self-sufficient and capable of growing some kind of food
* Be well-stocked with seed, fertilizer, canned food, wine, medicine, clothes, etc
And get a gun, he says…

It seems that George Soros, Al Gore, Lord Rothschild, The World Bank, the Harvard and other University Endowment Funds, China and many others are taking his suggestion to heart.
World Bank warns on ‘farmland grab’: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/62890172-99a8-11df-a852-00144feab49a.html
http://farmlandgrab.org/
Whether food is the next big “Investment Bubble” or if it is something much more ominous, the Grab for the World Food Supply that I have been watching for the past six years is increasingly worrying. Especially since the skuttlebutt was “Global Cooling” was on the agenda for the Bilderberg meeting a few years ago.

39. “The Forthcoming Grand Minimum of Solar Activity” can be found at the following site:
http://journalofcosmology.com/ClimateChange111.html
There are “three types of Grand Episodes that alternated during the last millennium (Duhau and de Jager, 2008). These episodes are the Grand Minimum (M: 1620 – 1724), the Regular Oscillations (R: 1724 – 1924) and the Grand Maximum (H: 1924 – 2009).”
Guess what cycle began in 2009?

40. crosspatch says:

Gail Combs says:

I remember watching a TV show once and the guest was the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Senator (D-NY). He was asked what investment he thought a person could make that would best prepare them for what he thought might be coming down the pike. He said to buy the very best shotgun you could afford and some property in the countryside. I don’t remember his exact words so I can’t directly quote him, but that is what he said. The host (I can’t remember now which show it was) replied with “A shotgun?” in a rather surprised tone, and Moynihan reiterated “Yes, a shotgun, and do it before it is made illegal to buy one”.

41. Just looked at Spaceweather.com and noted how the Sun is peppered with little spots. Seems that gone are the days of the large clumps of ugly black we used to enjoy. Now it’s some kind of huge event when a single sizable flare erupts every week or so. Has anyone gotten a handle on the current cycle? I mean, where are we at with it? Waxing? Waning? How long to the next downturn (normal predictable minimum)?

42. Gail Combs says:

crosspatch says:
December 2, 2011 at 9:34 am
Gail Combs says:
I remember watching a TV show once and the guest was the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Senator (D-NY). He was asked what investment he thought a person could make that would best prepare them for what he thought might be coming down the pike…..
________________________
I moved south, bought a hundred acres and followed the rest of the advice….

43. This is no better then the general circulation models and probably less well understood. I have said many times the GCM and other climate foolishness is akin to a Ouija Board. This is just about a good as that. What is does show however is how much we simply do not know. I think this stuff is great but then I thought the idea of GCM’s was great too. The trick is to uses these things to keep our thinking from getting to far off track and provide some arm waving abilities like the cosmologists. The trick is to not believe in your own mythology.

44. crosspatch says:

The trick is to not believe in your own mythology.

In politics that is called “breathing your own exhaust” and we see a lot of it these days.

45. Hoser says:

ferd berple says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:12 am

The massive die-off of human population is only possible if every country collapses simultaneously. That is a major reason why a synchronized global market one-world-government is dangerous. Countries go through cycles of growth and collapse. It is virtually inevitable that government will grow too powerful and corrupt. When that happens, it must fall and be replaced. Smaller cooperative and desynchronized economies will avoid worldwide boom and bust (the latter could become a runaway civilization ender). A United States of Europe would only make the problems the Europeans face even more tragic. There would be no strong Germany to help with a bailout of failed partners.
Gary says:
December 2, 2011 at 9:36 am

It’s intersting to see the northern hemisphere may be much farther along in cycle 24 than the southern hemisphere. Double peaks were observed in the solar maxima in the last few cycles. Cycle 23 had a very strong second peak during which the southern hemisphere activity grew while the northern hemisphere activity dwindled. The hemispheres are apparently still out of phase, and it remains to be seen whether that trend is increasing or not. There seems to be no theory yet concerning the cause or possible consequences of unsynchronized progression of each hemisphere through the solar cycle.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/bfly.gif
http://www.icsu-fags.org/ps11sidc.htm
Also, there seem to be no indications of any change in solar parameters suggesting the sun is on a path to a strong prolonged minimum.
http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~deforest/SPD-sunspot-release/

46. crosspatch says:

The massive die-off of human population is only possible if every country collapses simultaneously.

I disagree. I believe all it would take is one massive killing frost in the upper plains of the US/Canada. One single cold night could trigger it. It would start with a spike in food prices and end with great social upheaval and a lot of people killing each other. If it doesn’t disrupt the entire production/supply infrastructure, it will stabilize when the population has been reduced to where they can all be fed again. In Europe, the situation resulted in a collapse of the normal infrastructure processes and resulted in many years of wars and famine. Many areas of Europe did not return to population levels seen during the MWP until the 20th century.

47. Neo says:

I bet all of this is predicted with a “model.”
JUST IN: Boy claims to see Wolf, yet again.

48. Scott Covert says:

Is it getting harsh out or am I just hormonal?
What if Maunder isn’t the grandest minima? I’m guessing it isn’t even close. On the other hand We’ll probably be living on other planets or extinct by the time we see one.
Bring on Maunder II, we have new sattelites, let’s learn something!

49. cui bono says:

crosspatch says (December 2, 2011 at 11:29 am)
Last time Europe had the 30 Years War. This time, with the EU, Europe will probably have….another 30 Years War.

50. Stephen Wilde says:

“look at the 10.7 cm Flux. This measures the UV energy which directly effects the heat in the Ozone Layer. This is the thermal blanket that helps us become warm or cold”
I think that is right but the key issue to my mind is that the effects are differential at different levels leading to a cooling of the stratosphere when the sun is active and a warming of the stratosphere when the sun is inactive.
That is the only means whereby we can get poleward climate zone shifts when the sun is active and equatorward shifts when it is inactive.
Standard climatology suggest a warming stratosphere when the sun is active which would give equatorward shifting when the sun is active but in fact the shift is poleward when the sun is active.
The evidence is that sudden stratospheric warming events cause equatorward bursts of polar air as is well recognised.
Standard climatology simply does not fit the observations.
It is those shifts that change global cloudiness and albedo so as to change the amount of solar energy into the oceans which then affect the temperature of thje troposphere.
“CO2 or Sun ?”

51. crosspatch says:

What if Maunder isn’t the grandest minima? I’m guessing it isn’t even close.

I would say you are probably correct. Considering how short of a time we have been observing sunspots, the fact that we had one like the Maunder probably means grand minima of that extent are probably fairly common. They might even be the “norm” during glacial periods (my speculation). About 1/3 of the time of the last 1000 years has been in various grand minima.

52. I have not seen the new paper (I shall search for it), but Dr. Lockwood put his name to a sunspot projection, which was quoted at the recent Santa Fe Climate conference.
I found it lacking in reason, my comments are here:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7a.htm
(scroll down the web page).

53. Bryan Short says:

The first comment here had be a bit flabbergasted. Australia just got finished with the northern hemispheric equivalent of May. On top of that, it was 4.1˚F above normal for the month of November… quite significant for a “summer” month in Sydney. While it was very wet, all indications are that in fact Sydney has had a very tropical summer so far with very humid, hot weather compared to normal. A few days of predicted cool weather a “cold” summer does not make.

Richard deSousa says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:05 am
If we’re going to have a Maunder like minimum, it will be devastating for every living creature on this earth. Mass starvation, massive die out of our human and animal population as availability of food becomes scarce.
=============================
Add to that thousands upon thousands of nuclear warheads, especially all the ones hidden underground in the PRC (never part of any treaty) and Russia (now treating treaties like pie crusts in classic fashion). As “luck” would have it, the nations most adversely affected by loss of viable growing areas are those in the Shanghai Cooperation Org, meanwhile, the nations where the remaining breadbaskets will be happen to be in the Americas and Western Europe. The next world war will be the worst.

55. If sun affected major climate changes through the TSI (including UV etc) it would show up in the data, and there has not been a shortage of attempts to find such link.
I used Dr. Svalgaard’s data for the heliosphere’s magnetic field at the Earth’s orbit and compared to the temperature data, and there it was:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/HMF-T.htm
Details will be soon in the second article I am writing on the North Atlantic Oscillations (the first one is available on line, it deals with the AMO )

56. Lord Beaverbrook says:

ferd berple says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:12 am
Time to learn to grow your own Fred, there is a lot more technology available now to enable small scale production growing and rearing food, and also to protect it. No matter where in the global political spectrum you reside sometime in the near future people will start to realise, we are animals and this is nature.

57. Alan the Brit says:
December 2, 2011 at 7:38 am
………..
Not surprised by that. Dr Lockwood was indeed dismissing the link. Even Dr. Hathaway is getting around, another ‘Johnny come lately’; if you missed his recent radio interview (10 days ago) I got link here at the top of the web-page:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NFC7a.htm

58. pochas says:

“f we’re going to have a Maunder like minimum, it will be devastating for every living creature on this earth. Mass starvation, massive die out of our human and animal population as availability of food becomes scarce.”
C’mon, guys – Is this rhetoric really necessary? I’d rather see planning rather than scaremongering for a change. If we’re going to have to get our food grown elsewhere, let’s talk to the folks who will have to grow it. Loan them money to set up irrigation, transportation, whatever. Cooperate with the people who will be short. Heck, China has lots of lunch money.

59. GlynnMhor says:

Landscheidt was predicting the very same thing some time ago, and Smith’s examination of the changes in the Sun’s net angular momentum and their relationship to known Grand Minima fine tuned Landscheidt’s ideas.
http://www.landscheidt.info/

60. Chuckarama says:

I’m not sure GSM can be predicted, but it’s interesting to see the current trend and imagine if it continues.

61. D. J. Hawkins says:

ferd berple says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:00 am
Dr. Lurtz says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:28 am
Instead, look at the 10.7 cm Flux. This measures the UV energy which directly effects the heat in the Ozone Layer.
Isn’t 10cm UHF? Isn’t UV 100nm? A million times more energy per photon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Light_spectrum.svg
We all know that hairspray is what drives the Ozone layer. Climate \$cientists have told us this for years and they would know. That is why they created the Montreal Protocol, so that Dupont could continue to get royalties on a new refrigerant, once their patent on Freon expired. The Montreal Protocol made it illegal to make use of Dupont’s Freon patent once it expired. Instead you had to pay royalties on Dupont’s new patent.
\$cience in action

Ferd, I always read your comments with interest, but this is a very tired meme. By the time of the Montreal Protocol, the basic patent on Freon had been expired for about 41 years. Please, give it a rest.

62. Roger Knights says:

Harry Dale Huffman says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:46 am
There is clearly a strong subconscious urge on the part of many scientists today to put forth “dire” predictions, and for the media and/or the public to want to hear such–it’s the science version of “reality TV”, where the cast is over the top rather than just ordinary folks (and the favorite performers especially so–we might call this episode, “Snooky Finds the Sun in Bed, After a Late Night–And Goes Nuts”). Apparently, dire predictions are to these scientists and their readers what teasingly-unclad ladies are to mass market advertising–irresistible. Apparently the current generation is bored with a tired old Earth, and a Sun under which nothing is new. Can’t anyone else see we are dealing in such cases as this with bored children, rather than master scientists? When they grow up and get back to respecting the Standard Atmosphere (which my Venus/Earth comparison confirmed as the fundamental and stable atmospheric reality) rather than visions of runaway or meter-pegging climate, I will begin to take climate scientists seriously.

GRLs gone wild!! Delinquent teen runaways!!
It’s crying wolf … aka woofin’ … and we’ve heard it before. Many times. Enough already.

63. Hey, I just noticed that if you flip that graph, it could be substituted for the Tijander sediments in the Mann/Jones paper!
(Sorry couldn’t resist)

64. crosspatch says:

If sun affected major climate changes through the TSI (including UV etc) it would show up in the data

We don’t have the data. The only data we have of the UV that I was talking about has only been collected since well after the start of solar cycle 23. The data we DO have show a strong correlation to the change in UV with changes in the AO/NAO and climate models reflect the observation when provided that data.

65. crosspatch says:

What I find uncanny about that UV paper are the graphs in figure 7 of 8, particularly the top set of UVER daily irradiance measured in Spain when compared with the NCDC seasonal temperature graphs for 1992 through 2010 (base period set to 1990 to 2010 for the center line). I would expect the UV to be roughly the same for Spain as the CONUS (possibly with the exception of Spring depending on where the “ozone hole” spills from the pole in Spring).
This is the first correlation of data I have seen that matches the pattern of warmer summers and colder winters. Spring has a much “flatter” trend in the CONUS temperature graphs than Summer or Fall. Correlation does not mean causation, I know. But the relationship is still quite uncanny.

66. Bennett says:

Living in northernmost Vermont, I strongly vote for continued warming. I haven’t done any research on what life was like here during the LIA, but I’m betting it was damned cold and difficult.
Still, I do have 40 acres of mixed forest/pasture, a large garden, and several guns.

67. Jimmy Haigh says:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15995845
This might have been posted lread. If katla goes up it could be messy. It could be a “get out of jail free” card for the warmists. We know how it will go: “if Katla hadn’t erupted…”
I’m in a Charlie Parker mood so here’s “My Old Flame”.

68. Jimmy Haigh says:

Bennett says:
December 2, 2011 at 4:23 pm
“Living in northernmost Vermont…”
Here’s some moonlight….

69. Jimmy Haigh says:

Dennis Ray Wingo says:
December 2, 2011 at 3:35 pm
“Hey, I just noticed that if you flip that graph, it could be substituted for the Tijander sediments in the Mann/Jones paper!”
And if you build bridges in Finland it makes the atmospheric CO2 percentage increase. It’s a causation/correlation kind of thing. You can’t deny it surely?

70. crosspatch says:

I thought it was a “number of pirates” thing, Jimmy?

71. Gail Combs says:

crosspatch says:
December 2, 2011 at 11:29 am
The massive die-off of human population is only possible if every country collapses simultaneously.
I disagree. I believe all it would take is one massive killing frost in the upper plains of the US/Canada…..
_________________________________________
If it happens you can curse the name of Dan Amstutz. He is the S.O.B. who got rid of the US strategic grain reserves via his 1996 farm bill “Freedom to Fail” http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2000/00july-aug/lilliston.html
He also wrote the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Ag while he danced between being VP of Cargill, working for the USDA and working for Goldman Sachs. I doubt it was a coincidence that Goldman Sachs and Cargill profited from the 2008 food riots. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/27/how_goldman_sachs_created_the_food_crisis?page=0,1
The last I checked I think China was the only country with any real grain reserves. The USA got rid of the last of her reserves in 2008.
The North American Export Grain Association (NAEGA), started the Dan Amstutz Award for Amstutz’ outstanding job in betraying the USA to the global grain cartel.
Joint Letter with NGFA to President Bush, Arguing Against a Global Reserve Grain Stockpile: http://www.naega.org/images/pdf/grain_reserves_for_food_aid.pdf

72. crosspatch says:

I believe ethanol mandates and the use of high fructose corn sweetener are the main causes of the lack of grain reserves in the US (we have no grain reserves anymore, we live completely hand to mouth). Those two things have caused corn prices to rise. That causes farmers to take land out of wheat, oat, soy, barley and rye production and put it into corn. So we burn all the corn we can produce and run short of wheat which is why we now import things like wheat gluten from China with melamine in it. The melamine is poison but it causes tests for protein content to show higher which brings the gluten a higher price (test higher quality). A lot of dogs died from that a while back when the gluten was used in dog food.

73. An article appeared a few years ago in one of the more reputable newspapers, and it said,
The southern hemisphere will be flooded with refugees from a coming ice age.
Look in Australia, Aborigines were resident during the last ice age. Very little glacial advances, maybe less rainforests. So they survived in a hunter gatherer and fisher economy. Well we have domesticated animals, lots of good fruit and veggies, and wine, and …. beaut beaches as well as inland areas. Australia has lots to offer the world with selling food and meat, fish etc. The only proviso is you bring your money with you. Unless you are an asylum seeker of course, then we support you….forever if necessary. A full glacial is thousands of years away, if it ever comes,
Read Colleen McColloughs ‘Creed of the Third Mellenium’. She describes the next glacial period well, if in rather pretensious prose. But I remember turning my electric blanket on while her descriptive writing was brilliant describing how an ice age affected the Northern Hemisphere.
Or read Ice not Fire, Al! On the net.

74. crosspatch says:

Also, Gail, there is another strategic reason to eliminate the stockpile: If we feed enough of the world’s population having no reserve makes us a less tempting target for attack. If we have no stockpile it makes us fragile which makes it more likely countries will want to help defend us lest THEY starve. It is a way of making countries more interdependent.
But I really wish I hadn’t read “Goldman Sachs”. That is one outfit I would like to see eliminated from the face of the Earth at this point. Italy’s new appointed President and the head of the European Central bank are Goldman Sachs guys, too. Basically Goldman Sachs has bought the entire Western world at this point. It’s time to get rid of them.

75. Camburn says:

crosspatch:
I can only suggest that you look at the production increase for corn before you state that we have burned our “reserves”.
2. The reason we don’t have “reserves” per se, is that no one can afford to hold those reserves.
I agree that Godlman is hip deep in the financial mess.

76. Gail Combs says:

pochas says:
December 2, 2011 at 1:18 pm
C’mon, guys – Is this rhetoric really necessary? I’d rather see planning rather than scaremongering for a change. If we’re going to have to get our food grown elsewhere, let’s talk to the folks who will have to grow it. Loan them money to set up irrigation, transportation, whatever. Cooperate with the people who will be short. Heck, China has lots of lunch money.
____________________________________
And China is buying up farmland in Africa and South America as are hedge funds, University Endowment funds, George Soros, Al Gore, Lord Rothschild, The World Bank, Citi bank….
What you are missing is the change in treaties and laws that have force peasant farmers off the land. Mexico lost 75% of her farmers, Portugal lost 60% of her farmers, The Eu decided 2 million Polish farmers had to go and India has a farmer suiciding every 32 minutes.
This means the control of the global food supply is passing from the hands of independent farmers into the hands of a few wealthy corporations. The red tape in the new US food “Safety” Modernization Act will wipe out the last of the independent American farmers and may also make a backyard garden nearly impossible.
Trojan Horse Law: The Food Safety Modernization Act http://www.examiner.com/scotus-in-washington-dc/trojan-horse-law-the-food-safety-modernization-act-of-2009
Famine does not necessarily mean not enough food, it means NO ACCESS to food.
Amartya Sen won the 1998 noble prize in Economics. As a nine year old boy he witnessed the Bengal famine of 1943 first hand.
This was the famine that occasioned Winston Churchill’s remark that the famine was of no great account because the Indians would simply “breed like rabbits.”
THAT is the type of attitude that is STILL prevalent today and allowed Cargill, Monsanto, and Goldman Sachs to callously orchestrate the 2008 famine starving thousands so they could post record earnings.
<blockquote ….For much of his career, Sen focused on the fact that during the worst period of the Irish famine of the 1840s, “ship after ship sailed down the Shannon, bound for England, laden with wheat, oats, cattle, hogs, eggs, and butter.” Similarly, during the Ethiopian famine of 1973, food moved out of the hardest-hit Wollo province and headed toward more affluent purchasers in Addis Ababa…..
…food “counter-movements” led Sen to the insight that if governments were to intervene in such situations, famines would not be so very difficult to prevent. “The rulers,” he wrote, “never starve."
…Even so, said Sen, famines are not terribly difficult to avoid. Prevention requires the speedy implementation of emergency income-creation and employment programs, in combination with the broader social infrastructure of representative democracy and a free press, which happens to be the best early-warning system. Famine happens when rulers are alienated from those they rule, he explained, and a functioning democracy is a simple way to remove such alienation. Famine happens when there is no free press, because rulers tend to feel embarrassed when photographs of starving children appear on the front page…. http://frederickkaufman.typepad.com/harpersmag/Let%20Them%20Eat%20Cash!.pdf

77. Rosco says:

Theodor Landscheit predicted a solar minimum equal to or perhaps more deep than the Maunder Minimum years ago. He claimed it was due for about 2030 but the absence of El Nino or only weak El Nino effects will be overshadowed by cooling with La Nina conditions predominating.
There is a prediction which can be tested in the near future unlike the IPCC ones which no-one alive today will be able to laugh at with proof positive they were wrong.
The conditions in South East Queensland are suggestive La Nina is growing but not like late 2010 early 2011 yet. Hopefully it won’t as the last powerful La Nina was a disaster for us.

78. Gail Combs says:

crosspatch says:
December 2, 2011 at 3:38 pm
If sun affected major climate changes through the TSI (including UV etc) it would show up in the data
We don’t have the data…..
_________________________________
Actually Richard Feyman’s sister Joan Feynman was co-author of this paper.
Is solar variability reflected in the Nile River? http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/handle/2014/40231
Pop Science version: NASA Finds Sun-Climate Connection in Old Nile Records
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=1319

…Alexander Ruzmaikin and Joan Feynman of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., together with Dr. Yuk Yung of the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif., have analyzed Egyptian records of annual Nile water levels collected between 622 and 1470 A.D. at Rawdah Island in Cairo. These records were then compared to another well-documented human record from the same time period: observations of the number of auroras reported per decade in the Northern Hemisphere….
Feynman said that while ancient Nile and auroral records are generally “spotty,” that was not the case for the particular 850-year period they studied.
“Since the time of the pharaohs, the water levels of the Nile were accurately measured, since they were critically important for agriculture and the preservation of temples in Egypt,” she said. “These records are highly accurate and were obtained directly, making them a rare and unique resource…
A similarly accurate record exists for auroral activity during the same time period in northern Europe and the Far East. People there routinely and carefully observed and recorded auroral activity, because auroras were believed to portend future disasters, such as droughts and the deaths of kings.
“A great deal of modern scientific effort has gone into collecting these ancient auroral records, inter-comparing them and evaluating their accuracy,” Ruzmaikin said. “They have been successfully used by aurora experts around the world to study longer time scale variations.”
The researchers found some clear links between the sun’s activity and climate variations. The Nile water levels and aurora records had two somewhat regularly occurring variations in common – one with a period of about 88 years and the second with a period of about 200 years….

79. Gail Combs says:

crosspatch says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:35 pm
I believe ethanol mandates and the use of high fructose corn sweetener are the main causes of the lack of grain reserves in the US…
________________________________
Yes that was all part of the scam too. ADM made a mint off biofuel. There were a whole bunch of linked laws and treaties that set up the scam. Wiping out third world farmers was a main part of the goal.
The grain subsidies also made it more cost effective to factory farm Cattle, Hogs and Chickens instead of range raising them. Grass fed is going to be cheaper if the tax payer is NOT picking up the tab for the grain.
There is a real I gottcha in “Corn fed” The animals have been breed for fast growth on grain. They do not do well on straight pasture like the older slow growth breeds. Unfortunately a lot of the Heritage Breeding stock got wiped out during the UK foot and mouth disease fiasco.
As a Purdue University Prof said the loss of the older breeds could be a major problem in coming years. He was finding “weaknesses” in the commercial chicken strains.

80. Tom G(eologist) right on, partner. Only if all alarmists had just a knowledge of geology, archaeology and palaeoanthropology. And remember too guys, the arctic circle also has restricted hours of sunlight or excessive sunlight hours, like the Arctic and Antarctica. Norway and the Hebrides in Scotland, and parts of Canada and Alaska. They have 22 hours of sunlight for some months and the reverse in winter. Anyway, I wonder how they handle short days and long nights, most probably lack Vit D too.

From Scott Covert on December 2, 2011 at 11:43 am:

Is it getting harsh out or am I just hormonal?

Don’t know. Is it near your time of the month?

82. crosspatch says:

83. M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 2, 2011 at 12:32 pm
I have not seen the new paper (I shall search for it), but Dr. Lockwood put his name to a sunspot projection, which was quoted at the recent Santa Fe Climate conference.
The paper is here http://www.leif.org/EOS/2011GL049811.pdf
Mike Lockwood, Juerg Beer [ice cores], and I are conveners for a workshop designed to bring about a consensus [if possible] about the long-term behavior of solar activity. You can see our [accepted] proposal here: http://www.leif.org/research/Svalgaard_ISSI_Proposal_Base.pdf so in a couple of years, mainstream [!] science might [hopefully] have a unified and thoroughly vetted view on this.

84. crosspatch says:

The end goal of this effort is to use a vetted record of IMF B (or the Sun’s open flux (Φ)) for the past ~170 years to extend this time series back through the Holocene (~11,000 years before present) using the long-term 10Be and 14C data sets.
</blockquote?
Wow! I would love to see that when it is finished. I really wish we could see back to about the last glacial maximum or a little before it, though, to see of the sun behaves differently when we are in glacial periods.

85. Ninderthana says:

Is this the modus operandi of a person who professes to believe in and use the scientific method?
“..and I are conveners for a workshop designed to bring about a consensus [if possible] about the long term behavior of solar activity.”
“…so in a couple of years, mainstream science [!] might [hopefully] have a unified and thoroughly vetted view on this.”
Other than using words like the “the team” and “the cause”, you might think that this person was Dr. Mann or Dr. Jones. Consensus.., unified [view]….thoroughly vetted view… mainstream science… surely these are not the words of a scientist with an open mind?
Well, at least he does not stoop to smearing those who disagree with him on this issue like Mann and Jones has done.
“I’m busy right now. And most of the comments [on this post] are just the same old, tired sycophantic babble by the usual pushers of pseudo-science which we all have heard a million times.”
Isn’t it good to know that you can look forward to Dr. Leif Svalgaard telling what to think on this important topic. Don’t bother your little minds with any of those silly little independent thoughts that might lead you to stray from the party line……Dr. Svalgaard is here to save the day!

86. Ralph says:

>>M.A.Vukcevic says: December 2, 2011 at 12:32 pm
>>I used Dr. Svalgaard’s data for the heliosphere’s magnetic field at
>>the Earth’s orbit and compared to the temperature data, and there it was:
>> http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/HMF-T.htm
Vuk – you are the master of creating interesting diagrams with dozens of wiggles, and no explanation of what the hell is going on. Temperature? What temperature??
.

India has a huge wheat reserve, 200 million+ tons. Although much of it is rotting due to inadequate storage.

88. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 2, 2011 at 9:58 pm
………….
Thank you for the links. I wish you good luck with your efforts, taking down the SSN post 1940 (or alternatively taking up pre-1940) I can see (says he selfishly) only as helpful. I am a bit surprised by Dr. Hathaway not knowing of the Waldemeir’s hockey stick ‘trick’.

89. Mr Green Genes says:

Jimmy Haigh says:
December 2, 2011 at 4:55 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15995845
This might have been posted lread. If katla goes up it could be messy. It could be a “get out of jail free” card for the warmists. We know how it will go: “if Katla hadn’t erupted…

The last two paragraphs are the best bits!
But the biggest threat to Iceland’s icecaps is seen as climate change, not the volcanoes that sometimes melt the icecaps.
They have begun to thin and retreat dramatically over the last few decades, contributing to the rise in sea levels that no eruption of Katla, however big, is likely to match.

The BBC doing what it does best!

90. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 2, 2011 at 9:58 pm
……………….
I had a quick look through the paper (thaks for the link), not that I understood lot of it, with all references (which may or may not be correct).
– 10Be is less accurate than it is given credit for.
The correlation coefficient is shown as a function of lag (in units of a mean solar cycle length of 11.1 years
My spectrum toy calculates fundamental at 130 months (10.83 years, which by the way is very close to my ‘irrelevant’ formula period of 10.81).
Would difference between 11.1 and 10.83 for the calculation of the autocorrelation make any difference, I have no idea.

91. The end goal of this effort is to use a vetted record of IMF B (or the Sun’s open flux (Φ)) for the past ~170 years to extend this time series back through the Holocene (~11,000 years before present) using the long-term 10Be and 14C data sets.
I predict Leif’s consensus will confidently demonstrate a solar history with the minimum variation that can plausibly be derived from the data.
The research done by planetary-solar theorists indicates that the Sun itself will probably prove the new consensus wrong within 20 years. I sincerely hope Leif is still with us to witness whatever happens.

92. Leif Svalgaard says:December 2, 2011 at 9:58 pm
………………….
I read Space Science Proposal 2011, impressed with the assemblage of the personage. If you come to some agreement I will relish a great opportunity for more fun.
If the sun-Earth link comes up, it would be wise to consider that both oscillate at the same frequency, but the Earth’s side has a bit of phase modulation due to the ocean currents.
You can put these two in your briefcase and take with you.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/SSN-T.htm
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/HMF-T.htm
You got the data; you know it is as good as you can get so no need to elaborate.
If you get stuck you can use temperature to calibrate the sunspot number (smiley face)!

93. Gail Combs says:
December 2, 2011 at 6:25 pm ””If it happens you can curse the name of Dan Amstutz. He is the S.O.B. who got rid of the US strategic grain reserves via his 1996 farm bill “Freedom to Fail” http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2000/00july-aug/lilliston.html
He also wrote the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Ag while he danced between being VP of Cargill, working for the USDA and working for Goldman Sachs. I doubt it was a coincidence that Goldman Sachs and Cargill profited from the 2008 food riots. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/04/27/how_goldman_sachs_created_the_food_crisis?page=0,1
=========================
and the above(truncated by me) post of Gails , reminds me of the outcry this year when Russia refused to sell wheat, to make sure they could feed their own,(they did happen to have some billions of tons in their emergency stocks already, about a years worth, -unlike usa with about 40days give or take))
the advisory company that said dont sell, (and made a whole pile of money I bet) is the recently public stocks and trades mob, green??fields trees whatever.swiss based outfit, they seem to be getting a large hold over essentials trades.

94. Myrhh says:

Gail Combs says:
December 2, 2011 at 7:44 pm
Unfortunately a lot of the Heritage Breeding stock got wiped out during the UK foot and mouth disease fiasco.
As a Purdue University Prof said the loss of the older breeds could be a major problem in coming years. He was finding “weaknesses” in the commercial chicken strains.

Deliberately engineered to wipe them out? Wasn’t the last sheep cull started on one farm having catching a disease from the local laboratory?
All this ‘envioronmental angst’ against the loss of biodiversity is of the same ilk as accusing sceptics of being funded by ‘big oil’, all the while its the green marxists environmentalists heavily funded by them. Cheap coal is a great competitor, just as real gene diversity is to those wanting to control this in breeding stock and crops.
Joining the EU was Britain’s first taste of all that, the powers that shall no be accountable to anyone grubbed up most of the orchards and gave the apple production to France, from great variety to tasteless French grannie smiths and cox’s, and made it illegal to sell the seeds of old, non EU sanctioned, varieties – kept going through clubs set up to keep these alive, but not for general sale of seed or product. I think there’s been a bit of a change very, very, recently, but it’s limited.
Monsanto wants to control all grain production, forcing farmer in Iraq, just one example, to buy from them only and outlawing the saving of their own seed. Big corporation oil and pharma the bane of all our lives. Pharma determined to outlaw our free use of medicinal plants as they did hemp (medicinal and fuel energy and product such as paper and cloth, so the new ‘nylon’ industry too got behind demonising this great healing herb and general all round plant of life).

95. Gail Combs says:

tallbloke says:
December 3, 2011 at 2:53 am
The end goal of this effort is to use a vetted record of IMF B (or the Sun’s open flux (Φ)) for the past ~170 years to extend this time series back through the Holocene (~11,000 years before present) using the long-term 10Be and 14C data sets.
I predict Leif’s consensus will confidently demonstrate a solar history with the minimum variation that can plausibly be derived from the data.
The research done by planetary-solar theorists indicates that the Sun itself will probably prove the new consensus wrong within 20 years. If so, I sincerely hope Leif is still with us to witness it.
_________________________________________
Given what the Ice Core types did to the CO2 levels, I am not going to place bets with you.
The sun is constant is one of the foundations of CAGW so that is what will be found.
This peer reviewed paper starts off with a blatant lie, water vapor not CO2 is the most important “Greenhouse” gas. Then it is made clear they are looking for evidence to convict and hang mankind. IMPARTIAL??? Not bloody likely.

CO2 diffusion in polar ice: observations from naturally formed
CO2 spikes in the Siple Dome (Antarctica) ice core
INTRODUCTION

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most important greenhouse gas directly impacted by human activities. Ancient air preserved in polar ice cores provides extremely important information about the functioning of the carbon cycle in the past (e.g. Etheridge and others, 1996; Fischer and others, 1999; Petit and others, 1999; Kawamura and others, 2003; Ahn and others, 2004; EPICA Community Members, 2004; Siegenthaler and others, 2005). The reconstructed records extend direct measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentrations, which started in 1958 (Keeling, 1960), and may help us predict future climate under rapidly increasing CO2 more accurately.
The integrity of an ice core as a reliable archive depends on the incorporation followed by the preservation of the original atmospheric signal.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/CO2_diffusion_in_polar_ice_2008.pdf

The Siple core is treated as a classical proof that the pre-industrial CO 2 concentration in the atmosphere was about 70 ppm v lower than now (e.g. IP C C , 1990). One should note, however, that this core was exposed to post-coring melting. The melting, which must have caused important changes in the gaseous composition , was not reported by Neftel et al (1985) (see discussion in Jaworowski et al., 1992). The data from this core were adjusted to overlay exactly the recent atmospheric concentrations at Mauna Loa (Siegenthaler and Oeschger, 1987). A figure demonstrating this adjustment is reproduced in countless publications (e.g. in IPCC , 1990). The overlaying was achieved by assuming that the age of the trapped air w as 95 years younger than the ice. Without this speculative assumption the Mauna Loa and Siple data do not agree at all. As was indicated by Jaworowski et al. (1992), rather than representing the past atmospheric changes, the results show how the CO 2 concentra tio n s in the Siple core decrease with the increasing load pressure up to about 15 bars, due to clathrate formation, differential dissolution of gases in the intercrystalline liquid brine, and other processes in the ice sheet and in the ice core….
We are not discussing the validity of analytical methods used in the current CO2 studies in
glaciers. We criticize the quality of ice as a closed system , which is an absolutely essential criterion for its use to reconstruct the composition of the pre-industrial atmosphere. We also criticize the methodology of sampling, and biased interpretation of results. Ice is neither a rigid material, nor may be regarded as a closed system , suitable for preserving the original chemical and isotopic composition of atmospheric gas inclusions. Ice core drilling is an extremely brutal procedure leading to drastic changes in the ice samples, precluding their reliability for gas analyses….. In this interpretation differentiation processes in the ice were neglected or downplayed. In fact they were never thoroughly studied, and this is one of the reasons why the glaciological studies were not able to provide a reliable reconstruction of the CO2 level in pre-industrial and ancient atmospheres…. http://www.co2web.info/np-m-119.pdf
OUCH, no wonder Dr. Jaworowski was vilified. The Emperor and his court are NOT happy when someone points out they have no clothes.
What is also amusing is we are lead to believe the Antarctic Ice Core CO2 is representative of the whole earth’s CO2 when NASA SHOWS the Antarctic has a lower amount of CO2 than anywhere else on earth! http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpegMod/PIA09269_modest.jpg

96. Paul Vaughan says:

M.A.Vukcevic (December 3, 2011 at 3:46 am) wrote: “[…] Earth’s side has a bit of phase modulation due to the ocean currents.”
It’s the wind-driven ocean currents and those winds are driven by equator-pole temperature contrasts.
Sun = crank shaft
Equator-pole temperature gradients = differential transmissions
Westerlies = drive wheels

97. Ulric Lyons says:

@Leif Svalgaard says:
December 2, 2011 at 9:58 pm
“Such a record, sanctioned by those who have been passionately debating the issue over the past decade, will be invaluable for modelers of the solar dynamo, cosmic ray modulation, and climate change.” http://www.leif.org/research/Svalgaard_ISSI_Proposal_Base.pdf
With such discrepancies between reconstructions (your fig 1) and observations: http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/tmp/images/ret_13923.gif
I bet one could get a better reconstruction from ENSO phase and El Nino frequency.

98. M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 3, 2011 at 12:19 am
I am a bit surprised by Dr. Hathaway not knowing of the Waldemeir’s hockey stick ‘trick’.
He does know:
An interview with David Hathaway mentioning my work on the Waldmeier discontinuity and its importance; It takes some time to get there, starts around 3:57 and ends around
19:00. Some solar discussion before and after:

M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 3, 2011 at 3:46 am
If you get stuck you can use temperature to calibrate the sunspot number (smiley face)!
I spent a good deal of 1976 in the Soviet Union lecturing at various universities and institutes. One of those was an asylum for insane people [lunatics they called them] [no kidding]. The director of the asylum kept track of the general level of agitation of the inmates [patients we would say] on a scale from 0 to 5. He showed me a large chart on his office wall depicting the variation of his agitation index with time and claimed that there was a very high correlation with times when the Heliospheric Current Sheet swept over the Earth. He even in all seriousness [no smiley] that we should use his data to fill in the gaps in the spacecraft data…

99. Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 7:44 am
With such discrepancies between reconstructions (your fig 1) and observations: http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/tmp/images/ret_13923.gif
There is no discrepancy. On the contrary very good agreement, see Figure 3 [upper panel]
of http://www.leif.org/research/Semiannual-Comment.pdf
I bet one could get a better reconstruction from ENSO phase and El Nino frequency.</i<
Since none of those are influenced by solar activity, it would be hard to get such.

100. Latitude says December 2, 2011 at 6:08 am:
“Can we predict the onset of the next grand solar minimum
====================
……….. no”
====================
Of course we can!
We can also forget we ever made any particular prediction when our predictions never come to pass.- Study Climate Scientists – and learn!

101. Ninderthana says:
December 2, 2011 at 11:22 pm
surely these are not the words of a scientist with an open mind?
When it comes to the data, one should not have ‘an open mind’. Progress happens when scientists have thoroughly examined the data and agree on what they show so that further research can build on a solid foundation. Especially, as is the case here, when the experts involved have disagreed strongly in the past. An important ingredient is complete transparency and we intend all data, code, and all discussion to be available to the public, scientists and lay people alike [e.g. no paywalls]. Now, you may or may not understand this, but we can live with that.

102. ferd berple says:

Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 8:29 am
Since none of those are influenced by solar activity, it would be hard to get such.
Do you mean there is no evidence that these are influenced by solar activity? Or that the evidence is weak? Or that the evidence to the contrary is strong?
To say that there is no influence requires that we know everything there is to know about solar influences, ENSO and El Nino. There would be no reason to train new scientists or do any new studies if that was the case. The taxpayer could save a lot of money on needless research.

103. ferd berple says:
December 3, 2011 at 9:05 am
Do you mean there is no evidence that these are influenced by solar activity? Or that the evidence is weak? Or that the evidence to the contrary is strong?
Obviously, what is meant is that whatever influence there might be is so drowned in the noise that we cannot say with any confidence [and be honest about it] that there is any measurable or observable influence. This does not exclude people making all kinds of wild claims, just excludes them being taken seriously [except by themselves]

104. ferd berple says:

“D. J. Hawkins says:
December 2, 2011 at 3:06 pm
Ferd, I always read your comments with interest, but this is a very tired meme. By the time of the Montreal Protocol, the basic patent on Freon had been expired for about 41 years.”
Regulation and DuPont
In 1978 the United States banned the use of CFCs such as Freon in aerosol cans, the beginning of a long series of regulatory actions against their use. The critical DuPont manufacturing patent for Freon (“Process for Fluorinating Halohydrocarbons”, U.S. Patent #3258500) was set to expire in 1979.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorofluorocarbon

105. Ulric Lyons says:

@Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 8:29 am
Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 7:44 am
With such discrepancies between reconstructions (your fig 1) and observations: http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/tmp/images/ret_13923.gif
>There is no discrepancy. On the contrary very good agreement, see Figure 3 [upper panel]
of http://www.leif.org/research/Semiannual-Comment.pdf
I bet one could get a better reconstruction from ENSO phase and El Nino frequency.
>Since none of those are influenced by solar activity, it would be hard to get such.
Fig 3 is also very different to observations.
The only strong exceptions between solar wind speeds and ENSO phase since 1964 is immediately following El Chichon and Pinatubo.

106. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 8:24 am
I spent a good deal of 1976 in the Soviet Union ……….. an asylum for insane people [lunatics they called them] [no kidding]…. agitation index with time …… a very high correlation with times when the Heliospheric Current Sheet swept over the Earth.
I always wondered why the years of Maunder minimum were so productive for science and philosophy. Now we know; dr. Lockwood failed to spot connection in his above discussed paper.
Not to mention the Bartel cycle’s effect on fertility on the better half of the human population.

107. Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 9:38 am
Fig 3 is also very different to observations.
No, the red curve is OMNI observations and the blue curve is the reconstruction. As you can see there is very good agreement: of http://www.leif.org/research/Semiannual-Comment.pdf
The curves show 7 rotation averages to suppress the intermittent noise from the random fluctuations of the solar wind. This is very fitting to do as ENSO is also on the time scale of many months.

108. ferd berple says:

“Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 9:34 am
Obviously, what is meant is that whatever influence there might be is so drowned in the noise that we cannot say with any confidence [and be honest about it] that there is any measurable or observable influence.”
So, we don’t know either way “none of those are influenced by solar activity” because the noise level is too high?

109. M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 3, 2011 at 9:54 am
I always wondered why the years of Maunder minimum were so productive for science and philosophy. Now we know; dr. Lockwood failed to spot connection in his above discussed paper.
Not to mention the Bartel cycle’s effect on fertility on the better half of the human population.

Nonsense, you put yourself in the same category as the director of that insane asylum…

110. crosspatch says:

To say that there is no influence requires that we know everything there is to know about solar influences, ENSO and El Nino.

Well, there is one paper that SEEMS so far to show some correlation between UV energy and the AO/NAO but I haven’t seen anything so far that correlates with ENSO. That paper doesn’t have a lot of data collection (less than one full solar cycle so far from some point well into 23 until now ) so the jury is still out on that one.

111. ferd berple says:
December 3, 2011 at 10:00 am
So, we don’t know either way “none of those are influenced by solar activity” because the noise level is too high?
Scientists deal with what one could call ‘effective’ theories. That means that one takes into account what is clearly shown on the time scales and accuracies involved without worrying obsessively about what takes place below that [in the noise]. For example, it is absolutely certain that Jupitershine has an effect on the climate, because we are receiving light [energy] from Jupiter. But the amount is so minute that we don’t need to take it into account. Your argument is of the nature: “the chances I win the lottery is 50%: either I win or I do not”.

112. Ulric Lyons says:

@Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 9:54 am
The last 40+yrs of your red curve looks nothing like the observations http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov/tmp/images/ret_13923.gif.
Smooth out your noise and you have lost the critical data, the ENSO response time is fast. There is nothing random about SW variation either.

113. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 10:01 am
————
M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 3, 2011 at 9:54 am
I always wondered why the years of Maunder minimum were so productive for science and philosophy. Now we know; dr. Lockwood failed to spot connection in his above discussed paper.
Not to mention the Bartel cycle’s effect on fertility on the better half of the human population.

————
Nonsense, you put yourself in the same category as the director of that insane asylum….
Your lack of a sense of humour is becoming legendary.

114. New paper suggests sun may be headed for a Maunder minimum
Posted on December 2, 2011 by Anthony Watts
The recent low and prolonged minimum of the solar cycle, along with the slow growth in activity of the new cycle, has led to suggestions that the Sun is entering a Grand Solar Minimum (GSMi), potentially as deep as the Maunder Minimum (MM).
Taking one of the proxies like the reconstruction of A.Mangini et al. 2005, it can be seen that the MM is a ‘nip tide’ phase in a complex tide like function of two plutinos Quaoar and Pluto. The solar nip tide angles on the ecliptic of 90° were exact in the years 1630 AD and 1709 AD.
From this function a similar ‘MM’ will occur again in the
27th century AD. The signs of the solar events can be shown in common with a first maximum of three of a conjunction of the two plutinos, which took place in 1997 and has changed to about a solar tide like angle of 14° into 2011, ongoing with a slightly cooling effect. But there will be no deep minimum as the MM; in 2045 AD the temperatures will be arise and will reach a second maximum higher than today.
Because not only the plutino couple Quaoar/Pluto shows effects of global temperature changes, but also all neighbor planets from Mercury on outwards in the solar system, it is possible to trace and forecast the global temperatures in high resolution (over 6000 years in total).
This can be shown in a graph for the years 1550 AD until 1750 AD.
http://volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_6_lockwood_1.gif
There is a remarkable coherence visible between the reconstructed temperature function in time of A. Moberg et al. and A. Mangini et al. and a simple summation of solar tide functions of the couples from Jupiter outside fits mostly well in the time function.
It can be seen that in the time of no Sun spots, there is still a dynamic in the temperature function working, and these oscillations can be shown all in geometry with solar tides functions.
Maybe in this phase the internal solar oscillator of 1/11.196 years^-1 is free from tide like effects; before the first exact nip tide and after the second (in this graph) Sun spots occur with its nature of phase shifting like today (relaxing).
The similar time coherent function of d14C and d18O high frequency data suggest that these temperature anomalies or heat currents are well based on a periodic physical process. If there is a correlation between solar tide like functions and terrestrial climate, then there is a real connection.
A so called Maunder Minimum MM is not a physical observable. The Sun has its own oscillator, but the hole Sun is in harmony with its planets and must move around the barycenter in respect to the planets.
The point is to show a scientific connection. Sun spot counting for centuries hasn’t give answers about the nature of the terrestrial climate.
V.

115. Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 10:30 am
The last 40+yrs of your red curve looks nothing like the observations
The parameter that influences the Earth is the product of the magnetic field strength B and the solar wind V speed squared. If one only [incorrectly] plots the speed, the reconstruction matches very well even on a time scale of 27-days. But the ENSO is still a longer-term phenomenon “El Niño is defined by prolonged differences in Pacific Ocean surface temperatures when compared with the average value. The accepted definition is a warming or cooling of at least 0.5 °C (0.9 °F) averaged over the east-central tropical Pacific Ocean. Typically, this anomaly happens at irregular intervals of 2–7 years and lasts nine months to two years” [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o-Southern_Oscillation ] so, it is silly to fret about the short-term variations on the scale of one month [or 27 days].

116. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 8:29 am
Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 7:44 am
I bet one could get a better reconstruction from ENSO phase and El Nino frequency.
Since none of those are influenced by solar activity, it would be hard to get such.

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/ian-wilson-enso-epochs-and-earth-rotation-lod/
The ups and downs of temperature correlate with the preponderance of numbers of El Ninos/La Ninas, which correlates with Earth rotation rate, which correlates with the Sun’s motion relative to the solar system’s centre of mass, which also correlates with solar activity levels.
My wild stab at guessing the underlying mechanism is that it will eventually be discovered that electro-magnetism plays a much bigger role in the solar system than hitherto thought.

117. M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 3, 2011 at 12:50 pm
Hey you ENSO boys up the thread
Why make things complicated, when they are really simple. Enso has its driving mechanism
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/ENSO.htm
no solar wind or any other magic ingredient required

The ‘Pacific Driver’ is a magic ingredient until you explain it.

118. M.A.Vukcevic says:
December 3, 2011 at 10:49 am
“Nonsense, you put yourself in the same category as the director of that insane asylum….”
Your lack of a sense of humour is becoming legendary.

Most of the time it is impossible to tell the difference between being your wrong or just trying to be ridiculous 🙂
tallbloke says:
December 3, 2011 at 12:31 pm
The ups and downs of temperature correlate with the preponderance of numbers of El Ninos/La Ninas, which correlates with Earth rotation rate
None of this is new or interesting, as the LOD depends on the movements of the air and oceans as those change the moment of inertia leading to changes in the rotation rate to keep the angular momentum constant.
which correlates with the Sun’s motion relative to the solar system’s centre of mass, which also correlates with solar activity levels.
Now, those two are just wrong [do not hold up to scrutiny]. There is no significant correlation and no mechanisms for causality.

119. Ulric Lyons says:

@Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 11:48 am
“so, it is silly to fret about the short-term variations on the scale of one month [or 27 days].”
It makes all the difference to the ENSO condition at that scale, particularly at certain points in the year. There are clear changes in the ENSO vector that move simultaneously with the inverse of SW speed rises and declines. I am aware of the definition of an El Nino thanks.

120. Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 1:57 pm
It makes all the difference to the ENSO condition at that scale, particularly at certain points in the year.
Regardless, the reconstruction is very even at that scale.
There are clear changes in the ENSO vector that move simultaneously with the inverse of SW speed rises and declines.
This is unsubstantiated and not in the literature.
I am aware of the definition of an El Nino thanks.
You are giving a convincing imitation of somewhat who isn’t.

121. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 1:50 pm
There is no significant correlation

Yes there is.
http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/ssb-z-lod1.jpg
and no mechanisms for causality.
If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble by as much as two solar diameters in six years, I’m sure Jupiter and Saturn can make Earth’s length of day vary by a few milliseconds per three decades.

122. Jimmy Haigh says:

Bennett says:
December 2, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Ah yes. the immortal Billie…

123. bush bunny says:

For the present time, we are in for some solar activity, so we should expect less cloud formation,
depending on the season of course. There is another volcanic eruption expected in Iceland,
that might disrupt aeroplanes and add to cooling but it is their winter time. The Arctic circle and Antarctica are heading for six months of darkness. So it will get colder from now on for the Northern Hemisphere, most of it natural. It’s the summer temps we should worry about, if they get too cool, it will disrupt the growing seasons for crops or gardens. And that is what happened in the last ice age or mini ice age, the northern hemisphere had bad harvests. Warm creates evaporation, that creates clouds and rain. Don’t panic yet, we have years to adapt. Anyway the Durban Cop 17, seems to have drawn the conclusion, that they agree to disagree, and Australia and NZ and the EU are sitting there with a carbon tax or cap ‘n trade, permits for sale, like a shag on a rock.

124. ferd berple says:

Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 10:21 am
“none of those are influenced by solar activity”
To say something doesn’t exist because it hasn’t been demonstrated is unscientific. Pluto existed long before it was discovered.
Non-linear interactions can have strong cause and effect relationships well below the level of noise. The argument that an interaction cannot exist because it is below the level of noise assumes that you understand the noise. Specifically, that the noise holds no signal of interest that is not noise. That is a highly unlikely assumption.

125. Ulric Lyons says:

@Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 2:09 pm
Ulric Lyons says:
December 3, 2011 at 1:57 pm
It makes all the difference to the ENSO condition at that scale, particularly at certain points in the year.
>Regardless, the reconstruction is very even at that scale.
I can see many places where your reconstruction fails at monthly detail, all over the place behind your smoothed lines: http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Wind-Speed-During-Space-Age.png
so more reason not to use it for correlative purposes at that scale.
There are clear changes in the ENSO vector that move simultaneously with the inverse of SW speed rises and declines.
>This is unsubstantiated and not in the literature.
And predictably you would say the same for the SW speed forcing of land temperature deviations at even shorter time scales.
I am aware of the definition of an El Nino thanks.
>You are giving a convincing imitation of somewhat who isn’t.
To summarise, a change from an El Nino condition towards neutral or to a La Nina, happens repeatedly on a rising trend of monthly SW speed, and a weakening of a La Nina towards neutral or to an El Nino occurs repeatedly on falling SW trends. As mentioned before, the exception to this when there is a large stratospheric volcanic eruption, ie another source of cooling forcing an El Nino episode. This is not a full explanation as not every SW speed change alters the ENSO index, this will partly due to seasonal factors, and maybe due also to momentum of the system.

126. tallbloke says:
December 3, 2011 at 2:54 pm
“There is no significant correlation”
Yes there is. http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/ssb-z-lod1.jpg

What is the 30-yr lag? And you mean that the Sun didn’t wobble before 1840?
http://www.leif.org/reseach/LOD-Excess.png
If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble by as much as two solar diameters in six years, I’m sure Jupiter and Saturn can make Earth’s length of day vary by a few milliseconds per three decades.
They are all in free fall and feel no forces so the planets don’t “make” the Sun do anything.
ferd berple says:
December 3, 2011 at 3:17 pm
“none of those are influenced by solar activity”
To say something doesn’t exist because it hasn’t been demonstrated is unscientific. Pluto existed long before it was discovered.

Unicorns don’t exist. The Tooth Fairy?
Who said “doesn’t exist”? It has not been demonstrated, that is enough, because it means that it is not an important enough effect to be detectable and thus doesn’t need to be taken into account.

127. u.k.(us) says:

Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 4:42 pm
“They are all in free fall and feel no forces so the planets don’t “make” the Sun do anything.”
============
Really, the moon is in free fall, yet causes tides.

128. bush bunny says:

Leif what are you going on about? Free fall, that’s what parachutists do. The sun controls what planets do. It’s called gravity, may be wrong folks, or is electromagnetism. Sure the seas rise too
during a full moon, (king tides) and some get a bit more crazier during a full moon, i.e., lunatics. Weir wolves change skins, (only joking) and some old religions held their sabbats during the lunar cycle,
I don’t know what Leif is talking about solar wobbles, although some religious saint or whom ever
once said the sun wobbled and it stopped rotating.

129. u.k.(us) says:
December 3, 2011 at 5:06 pm
Really, the moon is in free fall, yet causes tides.
Apart from tides [which we have discussed many times]. The tides that Jupiter raises on the Sun is less than 1 millimeter high. There are 25.4 millimeters to one inch. So, yes, ‘really’.
bush bunny says:
December 3, 2011 at 5:45 pm
Leif what are you going on about? Free fall, that’s what parachutists do.
No, they are falling controlled by an atmosphere, and are acted upon by the force of air resistance. ‘Free fall’ is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_fall “Free fall is any motion of a body where gravity is the only force acting upon it”
I don’t know what Leif is talking about solar wobbles…
See tallbloke December 3, 2011 at 2:54 pm
If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble

130. CRS, Dr.P.H. says:

Pamela Gray says:
December 2, 2011 at 7:49 am
Tallbloke, you are absolutely correct. I haven’t a clue. Especially the variability part getting through our thick soup to such a degree that it smacks me in the face with something like, “Man oh man the Sun is quiet today. Must wear my fur coat instead of the stadium jacket.”
I suppose you are ready to tell me to never mind the descrepancy between our cold Pacific Ocean anomaly not matching the teeny tiny change in IR between a busy and a quiet Sun, or the power of eastern trade winds to blow warm water away not matching the teeny tiny power of UV variation on those trades.
Yep. I be clueless.
——-
*applause* We are not worthy!! That’s the way it’s done, great job, Pamela!

131. Stephen Wilde says:

The simplest solution is often the right one.
For whatever reason a less active sun results in increased global cloudiness for reduced solar energy into the oceans causing weaker El Nino events and a cooling troposphere.
I’ve provided a full explanation on many occasions here and elsewhere.

132. rbateman says:

ferd berple says:
December 3, 2011 at 3:17 pm
It was the first Grand Minimums out of the Roman Warm period and Medieval Warm period that caused the worst sort of agricutural calamnities. Not that the subsequent minimums were any picnic. Climate extremes are devastating and outliers are unpredictably prone to coming in bunches as latent heat energy oscillates with a cooling slope. That’s just the isolated Planetary System record. There is too much we don’t know of, or fully understand, beyond our local space that might present a driving force to Climate. e.g. – our Milky Way is clearly stratified along the Galactic Plane, and we won’t know about undiscovered effects until we are already immersered into these stratified layers.

133. Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 4:42 pm
tallbloke says:
December 3, 2011 at 2:54 pm
http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/ssb-z-lod1.jpg
What is the 30-yr lag? And you mean that the Sun didn’t wobble before 1840?
http://www.leif.org/reseach/LOD-Excess.png

What proxy is your LOD graph derived from prior to ~1840 Leif?
If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble by as much as two solar diameters in six years, I’m sure Jupiter and Saturn can make Earth’s length of day vary by a few milliseconds per three decades.
They are all in free fall and feel no forces so the planets don’t “make” the Sun do anything.

You are considering gravity only. I’m sure the disturbances the planetary magnetosphere’s create in the interplanetary magnetic field will create back-eddys which can “travel upstream against the solar wind”.
I won’t try Anthony’s patience by getting into a protracted debate with you at this venue. If you can bring yourself to offer some constructive input to my admittedly speculative thinking on this, you are welcome to contribute to the current thread on my blog where I have enlarged on my thinking concerning the 30 year lag and the averaging period. You could tell us a bit more about your LOD curve and how it has been generated too. Is it Sidorenkov’s?
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/ian-wilson-enso-epochs-and-earth-rotation-lod/#comment-10237

134. Ulric
If you are still about, some time ago you asked : what is the N. Atlantic SST precursor?
My article
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/theAMO.htm
has been on line for about a month now. The answer can be found from page 8 onwards, but I recommend taking a look at the rest too

135. Volker Doormann says:
December 3, 2011 at 11:14 am
Because not only the plutino couple Quaoar/Pluto shows effects of global temperature changes, but also all neighbor planets from Mercury on outwards in the solar system, it is possible to trace and forecast the global temperatures in high resolution (over 6000 years in total).
This can be shown in a graph for the years 1550 AD until 1750 AD.
http://volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_6_lockwood_1.gif
There is a remarkable coherence visible between the reconstructed temperature function in time of A. Moberg et al. and A. Mangini et al. and a simple summation of solar tide functions of the couples from Jupiter outside fits mostly well in the time function.
It can be seen that in the time of no Sun spots, there is still a dynamic in the temperature function working, and these oscillations can be shown all in geometry with solar tides functions.

The last similar ‘MM’ cold phase before 1645 AD occurred in the years of 535 AD ff. It is written:
“The Byzantine historian Procopius recorded of 536, in his report on the wars with the Vandals, “during this year a most dread portent took place. For the sun gave forth its light without brightness…and it seemed exceedingly like the sun in eclipse, for the beams it shed were not clear.” The Gaelic Irish Annals record the following: “A failure of bread in the year 536 AD” — The Annals of Ulster “A failure of bread from the years 536–539 AD”. Further phenomena reported by a number of independent contemporary sources: Low temperatures, even snow during the summer (snow reportedly fell in August in China, which postponed the harvest there). Crop failures “A dense, dry fog” in the Middle East, China, and Europe. Drought in Peru, which affected the Moche culture. “
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_weather_events_of_535%E2%80%93536)
“Abrupt changes in northern Fennoscandian summer temperatures extracted from the 7500-year ring-width chronology of Scots pine, the “most dramatic shift in growing conditions, from favorable to unfavorable, between two years, took place between A.D. 535-536” in Europe and Africa.”
The “remarkable coherence visible between the reconstructed temperature function in time of A. Moberg et al. and A. Mangini et al. and a simple summation of solar tide functions of the couples from Jupiter outside fits mostly well in the time function” also for the years of 536-539 AD as shown in this graph (from 450-650 AD, without Sun spot number curve):
http://volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_6_lockwood_2.gif
Moreover, 100 years later, when the solar tide function of Quaoar and Pluto was exact for the second time after the year of 528 AD :
“During the late sixth century and early seventh century, the Eastern Turkic Empire (i.e., the Eastern Turkic Khanate) was the most powerful country in the Northeast Asia. It collapsed suddenly in A.D. 630, and historians concluded that the combination of social, political and economic factors, as well as the invasion of the Tang Empire, would be the root cause. Here we suggest that a climatic cooling event ca. A.D. 627–629 could be the direct cause.“
‘German religious reformer Martin Luther (1483–1546) said Copernicus was “the fool who will turn the whole science of astronomy upside down.’ Seems that the climate dogma community have again hard times in expectation.
V.

136. tallbloke says:
December 4, 2011 at 1:36 am
What proxy is your LOD graph derived from prior to ~1840 Leif?
Proxy? The real thing: http://www.iers.org/nn_10398/IERS/EN/Science/EarthRotation/LODsince1623.html?__nnn=true
http://www.iers.org/nn_10398/IERS/EN/Science/EarthRotation/UT1LOD.html?__nnn=true
http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/earthor/ut1lod/lod-1623.html
I’m on the IERS mailing list.
You are considering gravity only. I’m sure the disturbances the planetary magnetosphere’s create in the interplanetary magnetic field will create back-eddys which can “travel upstream against the solar wind”.
You may be sure of this, but that does not make it so. And they can’t and they don’t, as the wind is 11 times supersonic. The usual riposte to this goes something like this: “you can see Jupiter by its light. Light is electromagnetic radiation, QED”. Are you in that camp? ‘back-eddy’? define that. Be specific.
constructive input to my admittedly speculative thinking on this, you are welcome to contribute to the current thread
With the things you are sure of, there is no hope for constructive work. It is like discussing the age of the Earth with these people http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

137. Agile Aspect says:

Leif Svalgaard says:
December 3, 2011 at 4:42 pm
“If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble by as much as two solar diameters in six years, I’m sure Jupiter and Saturn can make Earth’s length of day vary by a few milliseconds per three decades.”
They are all in free fall and feel no forces so the planets don’t “make” the Sun do anything.
;———————————————————————————————————————-
I’m curious as to how you would explain the Earth bound CME every New Moon?

138. Leif:
Your C19th notions of the propagation of electromagnetic force are reminiscent of the state of knowledge of the people you would like to stick me with. 😉
Thanks for the IERS links. You old goat 🙂

139. Agile Aspect says:
December 4, 2011 at 6:02 am
I’m curious as to how you would explain the Earth bound CME every New Moon?
So am I. You can start by showing that there are such.
tallbloke says:
December 4, 2011 at 6:06 am
Your C19th notions of the propagation of electromagnetic force
Our current understanding of the electromagnetic force is embodied in Maxwell’s equations from 1862. And they “underlie modern electrical and communications technologies”.

140. True, but they don’t equip us with what we need to understand many unexplained phenomena. Using equations to make our own innovations is not the same as using equations to understand nature and the cosmos beyond the bounds of our planet.

141. tallbloke says:
December 4, 2011 at 7:00 am
using equations to understand nature and the cosmos beyond the bounds of our planet.
This is what we scientists do well all the time. Newton’s laws are also still good for this although centuries old. The equations don’t help if you are so sure about something that you don’t use them.

142. I’m certainly not going to use them to exclude possibilities like you do. That’s just bad science.
Same goes for the equations used by the Greenwich Observatory to try to map changes in LOD prior to the 1850’s. What does their result look like if they project right through to the present day using the same method? Bet they won’t show us that, because it’ll highlight the inadequacy of the method.

143. tallbloke says:
December 4, 2011 at 7:40 am
I’m certainly not going to use them to exclude possibilities like you do. That’s just bad science.
If a possibility conflicts with Maxwell’s equations it must be excluded. You won’t because you do not understand science. Just like the people who claim the Earth is only 6000 years old. Not much can be done for them, nor for you, it seems.
Same goes for the equations used by the Greenwich Observatory to try to map changes in LOD prior to the 1850′s. What does their result look like if they project right through to the present day using the same method? Bet they won’t show us that, because it’ll highlight the inadequacy of the method.
How much are you willing to bet? \$1000?
For the interval 1623-1955, the data are those provided by L.V. Morrison, Royal Greenwich Observatory. They are based on accurate astronomical observations and overlap the other data set from 1846 on. With good agreement. You can plot the overlap yourself, or just compare my plot with yours for 1846-1955.

144. According to the IERS document you linked:
– from 1623 to 1860, by derivative of cubic splines fitted on individual values of the difference between mean solar time and dynamical time (13 knots),
– from 1861 to 1955, by a 5-point quadratic convolute.
Like I said, different methods. So if there is an overlap from 1846 to 1861 with good agreement, that’s fine. It doesn’t tell us anything about what the continuation of the pre 1846 method would look like if it ran through to the present day though. And the fact that they use a different method for the later period, and yet a third method for recent data implies the methods used for earlier data are less accurate.
TB: What proxy is your LOD graph derived from prior to ~1840 Leif?
LS: Proxy? The real thing:
BS Leif. its an inadequate numerical model, not the real thing. Something you and Steve Schneider never really grasped back in the 70’s. And obviously you still don’t.

145. The BEST team (Santa Fe presentation) identified 72 years as principal component for the land temperatures (from 1000s of their records)
LOD spectrum
74.07407 0.852277
73.3945 0.854827
72.72727 0.856192
72.07207 0.856676
71.42857 0.856234
70.79646 0.854859

146. Johnnythelowery says:

I’m glad for this thread. The Solar threads are always interesting. Wondering if our new flotilla of sun observing satellites has revealed anything we didn’t know?
About Leif’s sense of humour. His abrupt ending to recounting his trip to the lunatic assylum was hilarious! Vuk–you might want to end Sarc/off when you extend you facts into comedy as we can’t tell the difference most the time.
Anyway,.I still think the iron sun generates the sun spot correlation in the Iguazu river—- sarc/off.
I think we’re lucky to have Leif to even ask questions of on this most important of topics and if anyone has any new Science to challenge him; bring it on–he’d be delighted to be the second to know (gedditt??? As there is alot of un-peer reviewed, non-punblished, spagetti flavoured, hockey-stick shaped stuff thrown in his face). The Sun and the threads about it are most interesting.

147. Vuk, very interesting, thanks.

148. Johnnythelowery says:
…………….
Life is damn too short to take things seriously.

149. Carla says:

tallbloke says:
December 4, 2011 at 1:36 am
..If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble by as much as two solar diameters in six years,..
~
What can you tell us about the variation in the solar wobble. Do bigger wobbles in the free fall indicate slowing down and smaller wobbles indicate speeding up or what? How might this affect solar rotation length, cycle? When do they get bigger and when do they get smaller and why?
I’m pretending I’m freefalling with my planetary buddies. The free fall ascribes or traces a coil or vortex or trefoil? into interstellar space around, the galaxy?
Not to mention that the solar orbit is in the opposite direction of the interstellar winds and plasmas meeting us head on between 24 – 28 km/s depending on location. That’s a pretty good shock in the nose for ya.
Now what might happen if we start changing the background speed and density at that shock..? More secondary charge exchange with the interstellar plasma being accelerated back inside..
perhaps..
rbateman says:
December 3, 2011 at 11:56 pm
..outliers are unpredictably prone to coming in bunches as latent heat energy oscillates with a cooling slope. That’s just the isolated Planetary System record. There is too much we don’t know of, or fully understand, beyond our local space that might present a driving force to Climate. e.g. – our Milky Way is clearly stratified along the Galactic Plane, and we won’t know about undiscovered effects until we are already immersered into these stratified layers..
I’m wondering if we are part of Sco or part of Cen and what that might do to the above wobble.
But .. layers behind the solar system and layers infront of us.
Try and fathom the time scale and size we are dealing with here, for example:
From Micro- to Macro-scales in the Heliosphere
and Magnetospheres
Dastgeer Shaikh1, I. S. Veselovsky2,3, Q. M. Lu4, G.P. Zank1
..1.1 Turbulence spectra in the interstellar medium
It is a curious observation (Fig 1) that electron density fluctuations in the interstellar
medium (ISM) exhibit an omnidirectional Kolmogorov- like (Kolmogorov
1941) power spectrum k5/3 (or 11/3 spectra index in three dimensions) over a 4 to 6
decade range (Armstrong, Cordes & Rickett 1981; Higdon 1984, 1986; Armstrong
et al. 1990). The observed turbulence spectrum extends over an extraordinary range
of scales i.e. from an outer scale of a few parsecs to scales of few AUs or less. Interstellar
scintillation, describing fluctuations in the amplitude and phase of radio
waves caused by scattering in the interstellar medium, exhibit the power spectrum
of the interstellar electron density that follows a 5/3 index (Armstrong, Rickett &
Spangler 1995). The origin and nature of this big power law is described in an extensive
review by Elmegreen & Scalo (2004). Chepurnov & Lazarian (2010) used
the data of theWisconsin Ha Mapper (WHAM) and determined that the amplitudes
and spectra of density fluctuations can be matched to the data obtained for interstellar
1.2 Solar wind turbulence spectra
Solar wind plasma, on the other hand, occurs on much smaller scales, i.e. few thousands
of kilometers, compared to the ISM scales. A wealth of data from in-situ
observations is available from numerous spacecraft and reveals the nonlinear turbulent
character of the magnetized solar wind plasma fluid. It is evident from these
observations that the solar wind plasma yields a multitude of spatial and temporal
length-scales associated et al 1996) indicate that solar wind fluctuations,
extend over several orders of magnitude in frequency and wavenumber. The fluctuations
can be described by a power spectral density (PSD) spectrum that can be
divided into three distinct regions (Goldstein et al 1995, Leamon et al 1999) dependingwith an admixture of waves, fluctuations, structures and
nonlinear turbulent interactions. In-situ measurements (Matthaeus & Brown 1988,
Goldstein et al 1994, 1995, Ghosh
on the frequency and wavenumber.scintillations and scattering that follow a Kolmogorov-like spectrum spanning..
from 106 to 1017 m scales..
..

150. Pamela Gray says:

Only weather can change the temperature. And only a consistent entrenched weather pattern variation can create a hot or cool summer. Occasionally, the change can be decades long. So here is the KISS principal.
Figure out how much energy is required to sustain an entrenched sustained weather pattern variation long enough to change the trend from flat to rising or falling over a multidecade length of time. Then go looking for something with enough energy to match what is needed.
When considering the tiny rise in global temps over the past 30 to 40 years, if it was the Sun wut done it, someone would have had to lasso that thing and bring it a might closer to Earth in order for the maths to match.
So Tallbloke, cough up the maths if you are so convinced that tiny changes in the Sun (pick your parameter) can cause an entrenched sustained weather pattern variation long enough to change the temperature trend from flat to rising or falling over a multidecade length of time. You have to show that “the E of some solar parameter = the E required to sustain the weather change”. Now that’s what I call peanut butter and jelly math. It ain’t elegant but neither am I.
But don’t be sad if you come up empty handed. The anthropogenic CO2 crowd can’t come up with a defensible answer either.

151. Paul Schauble says:

Leif Svalgaard says:

The director of the asylum kept track of the general level of agitation of the inmates [patients we would say] on a scale from 0 to 5. He showed me a large chart on his office wall depicting the variation of his agitation index with time and claimed that there was a very high correlation with times when the Heliospheric Current Sheet swept over the Earth.

Does anyone publish past and predicted dates/times for when the Heliospheric Current Sheet sweeps over Earth? I’m curious what other phonomena correlate with the passage of the current sheet.

152. long pig says:

Stephen Wilde says:
December 2, 2011 at 11:53 am
“look at the 10.7 cm Flux. This measures the UV energy which directly effects the heat in the Ozone Layer. This is the thermal blanket that helps us become warm or cold”
I think that is right but the key issue to my mind is that the effects are differential at different levels leading to a cooling of the stratosphere when the sun is active and a warming of the stratosphere when the sun is inactive.
Then there should already – or soon – be some sign that the stratosphere is warming in response to the current downturn in solar activity. Have we seen anything of this yet?

153. Pamela Gray says:
December 4, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Only weather can change the temperature. And only a consistent entrenched weather pattern variation can create a hot or cool summer. Occasionally, the change can be decades long.
Well, I think if arguing on temperature changes over decades it is more useful to speak about global temperature pattern, because the terms weather and summer are fixed to only parts of the globe.
Figure out how much energy is required to sustain an entrenched sustained weather pattern variation long enough to change the trend from flat to rising or falling over a multidecade length of time. Then go looking for something with enough energy to match what is needed.
Maybe this is a way to a multidecade prediction of weather, I don’t know. It seems to me that there is a problem about the dimensions of all the elements of the heat current that match with local flat, up and down weather precisely. Moreover, it needs a heat source that drive that varying streaming heat current from warm to cold. And this is not simple energy in Joule; a pattern is needed that match with the global weather.
When considering the tiny rise in global temps over the past 30 to 40 years, if it was the Sun wut done it, someone would have had to lasso that thing and bring it a might closer to Earth in order for the maths to match.
I do agree in general, but it needs not only math but also logic, knowledge about the harmonics, pattern and laws in the whole solar system.
So Tallbloke, cough up the maths if you are so convinced that tiny changes in the Sun (pick your parameter) can cause an entrenched sustained weather pattern variation long enough to change the temperature trend from flat to rising or falling over a multidecade length of time.
I do not know what Tallbloke knows about this matter, but if you sums up – using fundamental math – some solar tide like pattern of couples over the time of years, decades, centuries or millennia, the profile match well with the well known temperature proxies from Eddy, Dansgaard, Bond, Moberg, Mangini, or hadcrut3:
http://volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_6_lockwood_1.gif
http://volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_6_lockwood_2.gif
http://volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_vs_comnispa_5k.jpg
http://volker-doormann.org/images/solar_fig_3.gif
http://volker-doormann.org/images/solar_fig_1.gif
If these pattern are not matching with the law of Sir Newton about gravitation using a mass, then it seems that it is not useful to take it.
A ‘mass’ of: 1.7801 * 10-36 [V A sec3 m-2] is equal to an Enegy of 1[eV]. From this we can clean up the dimensions kg and Newton to the trash. A force F [N] has then the dimension [V A s m-1]. The pressure P in [kg m s-2 m-2] has then the diimension [V A s3 m-3]. The angular moment D [kg m2 sec-1] has then the dimension [V A s2] and is equal to Planck’s constant h. Multiplied by a frequeny [1/s] is is an energy [V A s]. The gravitational constant g [m3 kg-1 s2] has then the dimension [m5 s-5 V-1 A-1]. The gravitational force F [ g x m1 x m2 x r-2 ] has the dimension [V A s m-1]. Because ‘mass’ m [kg] = E * µ0 * epsilon0 (permeability and permittivity of the universe) there is no need for a mass anymore {numbers are power numbers}.
It is well known that there is a strong relation between the angular moments oaf the celestial bodies and their magnetic moment:
http://volker-doormann.org/vasangmagmom.gif
This shows that there is a natural simple relation between electromagnetism and that, what we call mass.
Neither math is equal to science nor physics is. Science includes logic, geometry, algebra and the laws of physics. Mass, time or space or velocity are social definitions, but not physical forces.
V.

154. Stephen Wilde says:

“Then there should already – or soon – be some sign that the stratosphere is warming in response to the current downturn in solar activity. Have we seen anything of this yet?”
There is this:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/sola/5/0/53/_pdf
“The evidence for the cooling trend in the stratosphere may need to be revisited.
This study presents evidence that the stratosphere has been slightly warming
since 1996.”

155. Pamela Gray says:

Volker, you can call upon solar systems far and wide and measure their various “stuff”. But it matters little. The bottom line must be applied to Earth’s surface weather conditions. Your various “stuff” must have enough energy to get down to us and then still have enough energy to change and sustain the weather drivers over a long period of time to say that the recent trend is extraterrestial in origin. Think removing or putting into place a sustained blocking high. Think changing the AO from one side to the other of what we typically understand as positive and negative conditions. Think sustained temperature inversions. Think keeping water vapor levels at a sustained and prolonged amount. Think keeping the tropical ocean in a sustained El Nino or La Nina pattern. There. Just. Isn’t. Enough. Extraterrestial. Anomalous. Energy.

156. Pamela Gray says:
December 4, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Only weather can change the temperature. And only a consistent entrenched weather pattern variation can create a hot or cool summer. Occasionally, the change can be decades long. So here is the KISS principal.
Figure out how much energy is required to sustain an entrenched sustained weather pattern variation long enough to change the trend from flat to rising or falling over a multidecade length of time. Then go looking for something with enough energy to match what is needed.

What if small changes in one input cause another part of a system to flip state? No ongoing or continuous energy required to keep it there from the thing that causes the flip if theres a store of other energy available internally. If you understood anything about systems engineering, you wouldn’t try to make out that climate should be characterised in stupidly simple ways.
When considering the tiny rise in global temps over the past 30 to 40 years, if it was the Sun wut done it, someone would have had to lasso that thing and bring it a might closer to Earth in order for the maths to match.
The ocean retains energy on timescales ranging from hours to millions of years. Logically, there is a rate of insolation AT THE SURFACE at which it neither gains nor loses energy. Empirical examination of records reveals this to be at the average SSN of @40. When the sun is more active than that 40SSN for most of a century, the ocean, surprise surprise, warms up. I built the model, the maths matches. All it needs is a little amplification from cloud albedo changes for which there is theoretical and empirical support.
So Tallbloke, cough up the maths if you are so convinced that tiny changes in the Sun (pick your parameter) can cause an entrenched sustained weather pattern variation long enough to change the temperature trend from flat to rising or falling over a multidecade length of time. You have to show that “the E of some solar parameter = the E required to sustain the weather change”. Now that’s what I call peanut butter and jelly math. It ain’t elegant but neither am I.
Here you go, plus you get a bonus of a method allowing you to predict the future temperature too.
http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/my-simple-solar-planetary-energy-model/
But don’t be sad if you come up empty handed. The anthropogenic CO2 crowd can’t come up with a defensible answer either.
What’s sad is when someone keep demanding answers and then ignoring them when they’re given.

157. Carla says:
December 4, 2011 at 4:47 pm
tallbloke says:
December 4, 2011 at 1:36 am
..If Jupiter and Saturn can make the Sun wobble by as much as two solar diameters in six years,..
~
What can you tell us about the variation in the solar wobble. Do bigger wobbles in the free fall indicate slowing down and smaller wobbles indicate speeding up or what? How might this affect solar rotation length, cycle? When do they get bigger and when do they get smaller and why?

Theodor landscheidt says:
“The contribution of the orbital momentum to the total angular momentum
is not negligible. The maximum value reaches 25% of the Sun’s spin
momentum. In addition, there is strong variation. The orbital
angular momentum varies from 0.1 x 10^47 to 4.3 x 10^47 g cm2 s1 or
reversely, which is more than a forty-fold increase or decrease. If
there were transfer of angular momentum from the Sun’s orbit to the
spin on its axis, this could make a difference of more than 5% in
its equatorial rotational velocity (Blizard, 1982). Such
acceleration or deceleration has been actually observed
(Landscheidt, 1976). This seems to be indicative of a case of
spin-orbit coupling of the spinning Sun and the Sun revolving about
the center of mass involving transfer of angular momentum
(Landscheidt, 1986b, 1988). Coupling could result from the Sun’s
motion through its own ejected plasma. The low corona can act as a
brake on the Sun’s surface (Dicke, 1964).”:
The wobbles get bigger and smaller depending on the alignment of the outer planets at the time. there are extended periods of ‘harmonious motion’ (see my avatar) when activity increases and climate improves, and periods of ‘disharmonious motion’ when activity decreases and climate deteriorates. (Charvatova).

158. Pamela Gray says:
December 6, 2011 at 7:02 am
Your various “stuff” must have enough energy to get down to us and then still have enough energy to change and sustain the weather drivers over a long period of time to say that the recent trend is extraterrestial in origin.
No. I wrote “ It seems to me that there is a problem about the dimensions of all the elements of the heat current that match with local flat, up and down weather precisely. Moreover, it needs a heat source that drive that varying streaming heat current from warm to cold. And this is not simple energy in Joule; a pattern is needed that match with the global weather. – it needs not only math but also logic, knowledge about the harmonics, pattern and laws in the whole solar system.
I have shown a pattern from the heliocentric ‘geometry’ of about 10 bodies in our solar system that can be used to fit with the global temperature proxies 5000 year back in time with a resolution of month and that can be used to forecast the global temperature proxies for the next 1000 years with a resolution of month.
These facts do not became untrue if the physical mechanism is not known yet.
V.

159. Gail Combs says:

Pamela Gray says:
December 6, 2011 at 7:02 am
Volker, you can call upon solar systems far and wide and measure their various “stuff”. But it matters little. The bottom line must be applied to Earth’s surface weather conditions. Your various “stuff” must have enough energy to get down to us and then still have enough energy to change and sustain the weather drivers over a long period of time to say that the recent trend is extraterrestial in origin…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You forget the oceans are giant heat sinks that store energy. The oceans have oscillations and you can not have oscillations without adding energy. The energy does not have to be a large amount just a small push (high solar energy) or pull (low solar energy) over the 30 to 40 year upswing or down swing of the oscillation. (think a kid on a swing)
Here is another way that the total solar insolation as seen on earth can be changed.
This is from a solar panel website.
Monthly insolation levels in kWh/m 2/day (Data provided by NASA) http://www.solarpanelsplus.com/solar-insolation-levels/
Here is Phoenix AZ (33’26″N)
Jan 3.25, June 7.7, July 6.99, Avg 5.38
Birmingham (Al 33’34″N)
Jan 2.29, June 5.98, July 5.81 Avg 4.34
Atlanta GA (33’39″N)
Jan 2.13 , June 6.01, July 5.81 , Avg 4.37
Data for the month of June 2011 from weather underground:
Phoenix AZ, No Rain Humidity ~ 10-25%
Birmingham 13 T-storms Humidity ~ 50 – 95%
Atlanta 12 T-storms Humidity ~60 – 95%
(humidity is VERY rough by a quick eyeballing)
So for very similar latitudes the insolation levels in June changed by 0.7 kWh/m 2/day due to water vapor/rain assuming everything else is constant.

CERN Experiment Confirms Cosmic Rays Influence Cloud Seeds
it appears that a non-visible light irradiance effect on Earth’s cloud seeds has been confirmed. The way it is posited to work is that the effect of cosmic rays (modulated by the sun’s magnetic variations which either allow more or deflect more cosmic rays) creates cloud condensation nuclei in the Earth’s atmosphere. With more condensation nuclei, more clouds form and vice-versa. Clouds have significant effects on TSI at the surface…

This is from a solar panel website.
Monthly insolation levels in kWh/m 2/day (Data provided by NASA) http://www.solarpanelsplus.com/solar-insolation-levels/
Here is Phoenix AZ (33’26″N)
Jan 3.25, June 7.7, July 6.99, Avg 5.38
Birmingham (Al 33’34″N)
Jan 2.29, June 5.98, July 5.81 Avg 4.34
Atlanta GA (33’39″N)
Jan 2.13 , June 6.01, July 5.81 , Avg 4.37
The month of June 2011:
Phoenix AZ, No Rain Humidiy 10-25%
Birmingham 13 T-storms Humidiy 50 – 95%
Atlanta 12 T-storms Humidiy 60 – 95%
So for very similar latitudes the insolation levels in June changed by 0.7 kWh/m 2/day due to water vapor/rain assuming everything else is constant. That is a heck of a big change all due to water vapor/rain.

CERN Experiment Confirms Cosmic Rays Influence Cloud Seeds
it appears that a non-visible light irradiance effect on Earth’s cloud seeds has been confirmed. The way it is posited to work is that the effect of cosmic rays (modulated by the sun’s magnetic variations which either allow more or deflect more cosmic rays) creates cloud condensation nuclei in the Earth’s atmosphere. With more condensation nuclei, more clouds form and vice-versa. Clouds have significant effects on TSI at the surface…

160. Gail Combs says:

OOPs I should have also added the altitude (elevation)
Phoenix AZ, 1132ft
Birmingham AL, 644ft
Atlanta GA ,1026ft
So that should not effect the results very much.

161. Pamela Gray & Gail Combs
I would be foolish to disagree with either of you, so I shall start ‘smartly’ by taking no sides and declare: as I see it both ladies are correct in their assertions.
Here is shown system of the Arctic currents:
http://www.divediscover.whoi.edu/arctic/images/ArcticCurrents-labels.jpg
Warm salty water is heavier than fresh cold water, and they do not mix = thermo-haline circulation. Cold fresh water found in the Arctic acts as a lid on the warm water underneath. Now consider this not very appropriate but interesting physical process that even I as a very inept cook, am well familiar with: lid on the boiling pot of water starts its self-propelled oscillations with no similar oscillations in the gas burner’s flow of the heat delivery.
Well, Artic doesn’t boil, but at certain point lower hot saline water will attain degree of expansion when its falling density will force it upwards causing large effect on the ice melt and formation and drastic change in the atmospheric pressure above; it is mainly summer effect, when large areas are ice free; couple or so decades later the equilibrium will be re-established, all back to square one.
This of course doesn’t exclude certain amount of feedback on the Atlantic inflow and the Arctic outflow.
Speculative – yes, operating mechanism possible – yes, existing proof available – not as yet but we are nearly there.
The above described process is mirrored in the fundamental link between Reykjavik atmospheric pressure and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillations as in very detail described here:
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/64/12/35/PDF/NorthAtlanticOscillations-I.pdf
see page 7 and above.

162. Gail Combs says:
December 6, 2011 at 10:34 am
Pamela Gray says:
December 6, 2011 at 7:02 am
Volker, you can call upon solar systems far and wide and measure their various “stuff”. But it matters little. The bottom line must be applied to Earth’s surface weather conditions. Your various “stuff” must have enough energy to get down to us and then still have enough energy to change and sustain the weather drivers over a long period of time to say that the recent trend is extraterrestial in origin…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You forget the oceans are giant heat sinks that store energy. The oceans have oscillations and you can not have oscillations without adding energy. The energy does not have to be a large amount just a small push (high solar energy) or pull (low solar energy) over the 30 to 40 year upswing or down swing of the oscillation. (think a kid on a swing).

In this thread the subject is the Lockwood et al. paper: ‚The persistence of solar activity indicators and the descent of the Sun into Maunder Minimum conditions’ and Anthony has selected three Key Points:
– Can we predict the onset of the next grand solar minimum
– Grand minima can be predicted using some solar indices
– The design and operation of systems influenced by space climate can be optimised
I have argued in this thread with astronomic reasons that the next ‘Maunder like Minimum’ will occur in the 27th century AD, because the main solar heat variation is indicated by a couple with a period of 2/1827 years and a complicated function with normal three exact phases, which are related to three minima and three maxima over a time interval of about 200 years.
This can be seen in this graph:
http://volker-doormann.org/images/lockwood_vs_ghi_4.gif
In the time of the ‘Maunder Minimum’ after 1600 AD the couple of Quaoar and Pluto have twice crossed a solar nip tide configuration or as astronomer said a nip tide constellation. In February 1997 AD the couple of Quaor and Pluto have crossed the first time (of tree) a solar spring tide constellation from a heliocentric conjunction of both objects. And it is seen in the graph that the decline in the function after 1997 AD is temporary until about 2040 AD and will increase then to a higher maximum than today or the last 10 years, when the couple will again build a heliocentric conjunction because of the decreasing velocity of Pluto from its eccentric path around the Sun.
From that it is still right that there will be ‘descent’ of the Sun power in the next decades, but it has not the impact of a ‘Maunder Minimum’ like ~300 years ago.
The key points of the paper of Lockwood et al. may have a relevance for consumers of headline news; algebraic gymnastic must not mean serious climate science.
I cannot see, what your theory about a swing is relevant here.
V.

163. Ulric Lyons says:

@Volker Doormann says:
December 5, 2011 at 5:15 am
How would you know from this about NH land temperatures through the 1962/3 winter ?
That winter had the same heliocentric configuration as some of the coldest NH winters in the last 2000yrs including the only two times that the River Nile froze.

164. Ulric Lyons says:
December 7, 2011 at 6:06 am
@Volker Doormann says:
December 5, 2011 at 5:15 am
How would you know from this about NH land temperatures through the 1962/3 winter ?
That winter had the same heliocentric configuration as some of the coldest NH winters in the last 2000yrs including the only two times that the River Nile froze.

One of the coldest days in April in Perth Australia (SH) was on the 23 April 1963 with 14°C.
The red curve in that plot is the hadcrut3 global temperature reconstruction. This means that the curve is hopefully (!) free from seasons in the NH or SH. Because the blue curve is simple a summation of heliocentric geometries it would be wrong to compare the blue curve with the reconstructed temperatures of one of the two hemispheres. From this it is not possible with this astronomic method to simulate the temperatures for the NH or SH alone.
You can see in the next plot also the hadcrut3 NH and SH temperatures, and mostly both the global hadcrut3 curve and the GHI 11 curve are in between the curves from NH and SH:
And that makes sense.
V.

165. Agile Aspect says:

Agile Aspect says:
December 4, 2011 at 6:02 am
“I’m curious as to how you would explain the Earth bound CME every New Moon?”
Leif Svalgaard says:
December 4, 2011 at 6:33 am
“So am I. You can start by showing that there are such.”
Really? Interesting. Well it’s easy enough to show it occurs but you’ll have to do you own homework.
Also, you might want to Google for the 3 body problem.
“They are all in free fall and feel no forces so the planets don’t “make” the Sun do anything.”
This implies you’re transforming away the force of gravity in space and time and replacing it with geometry described by 10 nonlinear coupled partial differential equations in space-time, i.e., general relativity.
And assuming you can solve these equations within your lifetime, in the end, you’ll need to make the low velocity approximation, in which case, you’re back in space and time with a Newtonian description.
Basically you’re feeding people a pile of dung because evidently transforming to center of mass coordinates (a standard technique in physics) appears to be beyond your ken.

166. Agile Aspect says:

Paul Vaughan says:
December 3, 2011 at 7:44 am
It’s the wind-driven ocean currents and those winds are driven by equator-pole temperature contrasts.
Sun = crank shaft
Equator-pole temperature gradients = differential transmissions
Westerlies = drive wheels
;————————————————————————————-
water vapor = nonlinear governor

167. Gail Combs says:

Volker Doormann says: @ December 7, 2011 at 4:55 am

Gail Combs says:
The energy does not have to be a large amount just a small push (high solar energy) or pull (low solar energy) over the 30 to 40 year upswing or down swing of the oscillation. (think a kid on a swing).

I cannot see, what your theory about a swing is relevant here.
________________________________
I am talking about the fact that a Perpetual Motion Machine can not exist. Therefore You can not have an oscillation WITHOUT adding energy. That energy comes from the sun, as does every bit of energy (not including geothermal)
Ulric Lyons @ December 6, 2011 at 4:47 pm Provided a mechanism for influencing the polar jets (Thank you)
“Think changing the AO from one side to the other of what we typically understand as positive and negative conditions.” http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682600000808
All I am saying is that it is very very foolish to dismiss the effects of the sun on the weather just because we are told it is “Constant” ESPECIALLY when you have a “Capacitor” like the oceans in the mix as well as the “Knave of Fools” water vapor.

168. Gail Combs says:

M.A.Vukcevic says: @ December 6, 2011 at 11:58 am
Pamela Gray & Gail Combs
I would be foolish to disagree with either of you….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Vukcevic, one of the things I really like about you is that you think “Outside the Box” and therefore challenge those who are entrenched.

169. Ulric Lyons says:

@Volker Doormann says:
December 7, 2011 at 10:35 am
“From this it is not possible with this astronomic method to simulate the temperatures for the NH or SH alone.”
So you can`t simulate seasonal or monthly land temperature anomalies in either hemisphere with this method ? surely that is what is needed though ?

170. Gail Combs says:
December 7, 2011 at 3:51 pm
The energy does not have to be a large amount just a small push (high solar energy) or pull (low solar energy) over the 30 to 40 year upswing or down swing of the oscillation. (think a kid on a swing).
Volker Doormann says: @ December 7, 2011 at 4:55 am
“I cannot see, what your theory about a swing is relevant here.”
I am talking about the fact that a Perpetual Motion Machine can not exist. Therefore You can not have an oscillation WITHOUT adding energy. That energy comes from the sun, as does every bit of energy (not including geothermal)

Well, I don’t get your point. You talk about oscillations of periods of ‘20 to 30’ years on the Earth. You do not say anything about the relevance here (MM).
That what I have understood is this: Temperature is a state in an (earth) located matter resulting from a heat current driven by a heat source. The heat current is floating from warm to cold. Depending on the impedances in the heat current there are variations possible depending on the time constant of the elements. Additional to that the heat source (the Sun) can vary its power [in Watt] depending on the activity trigger. From the homestake experiment it is known that the Neutrino capture rate from the Sun is varying and the variations are in phase with the global temperatures:
http://www.volker-doormann.org/images/ghi_sst_snu_ghi8.gif
Because it is known that the Neutrio Rate is linked to the fusion processes in the core of the Sun, this is an indication for a variation of the heat power from the Sun. Moreover, there are indications that these variation are in harmony with solar tide like constellations of couples in the solar system. All these frequency triggers are superimposed so that there is no single frequency easy to found.
Regarding the Earth frequencies, it is not so easy to understand the climate phenomena, because it is true that a Perpetual Motion Machine cannot be constructed, but Perpetual Motion exist in the perpetual motion of the celestial bodies including the perpetual motion of the Sun stable mostly over millions of years. This phenomena is well known to all physicians as the law of the conservation of energy. If you argue on an oscillator that needs energy, it is a machine with an energy loss maybe from friction. But we have to distinguish oscillation of fluids as mass from the varying heat current with its impedances.
We can observe a wobble of the Earth axis called Chandler wobble. The frequency is : 1/1.186 years^-1. This in a 10:1 resonance with Jupiter 1/11.862 years^-1, and 4:1 resonance of 1/4.742 years^-1 with the ENSO frequency, and a 2:1 resonance 1/2.371 years^-1 with the QBO frequency. Who can say in the cases of perpetual motion of celestial bodies in resonance that there is a loss of energy?
I agree with you that the heat oven is the Sun. There were global temperature steps of about 8°C in two years 20000 years ago with a saw tooth profile and relaxing times of ~60000 years, and there is no indication that these saw tooth oscillations of this frequency are from terrestrial heat processes.
Frequencies are connected to the geometry (size) in general and frequencies of 1/1 year^-1 can be connected to the perpetual motion of the Earth around the Sun, but an oscillation of ~1000 year periodes of the global climate has no home on the Earth.
V.

171. Ulric Lyons says:
December 7, 2011 at 4:02 pm
@Volker Doormann says:
December 7, 2011 at 10:35 am
“From this it is not possible with this astronomic method to simulate the temperatures for the NH or SH alone.”
So you can`t simulate seasonal or monthly land temperature anomalies in either hemisphere with this method

Yes.
V.

172. LazyTeenager says:

Fred Berple says
UV varies as much as 15% during the solar cycle. Something Climate Science and Solar Science has not accounted for. The Temperature of the earth is about 300K. A 15% change is about 45C. And we are set to end industrialization and condemn most of the world to poverty over 2C?
————
Nup! Let’s assume that UV does vary by 15%. But the UV is only a small faction of the suns output. So 15% of 300K is not the right thing to calculate.