Newsbytes: Sunspot Enigma – Will Inactive Sun Cause Global Cooling?

Salvatore Del Prete
lf the Polar jet splits then the cooling could be sudden.
Because if the Polar jet splits then you are likely to get large blocking highs sitting in the middle.
So during the winter you are likely to get large pools of cold air sitting in the middle of these split jets. Now because you have got the jet flowing to the north and the south of these pools of cold air. Then its very likely there will be active weather fronts moving into this cold air both from the north and the south. What you are likely to get with this set up is not only cold but heavy snowfall as well. You will not want this sort Polar jet pattern setting in for to many years.

Brad says (July 24, 2013 at 11:50 am): “Good post, but I could have limited without the witch doctor section. Seems a bit petty and out of place.”
Q: What’s the difference between the Met Office and a witch doctor?
A: The witch doctor’s weather forecasts are occasionally correct. 🙂

taobabe says, July 24, 2013 at 2:22 pm
“The Sun, The Earth, and Near Earth Space”. A Guide to the Sun-Earth System by John A. Eddy, NASA Publication #NP-2009-1-066-GSFC. Free to download (either the entire book or in parts) here: http://ilwsonline.org/ilws_publications.htm

We need to build a wormhole, place an uploaded copy of a fast-grown human mind into it, using the wormhole itself as refrigeration and lower the end containing the upload into the sun so she can study the sun!

There is a course at UNE supervised by Associate Prof Robert Baker, that I am thinking of pursueing towards my MA, I have already got my BA majoring in archaeology and palaeoanthropology and GCA (Graduate Certificate in Arts) that is mid way between a BA and MA, but this one is about sea levels and climate change. At one instance I sat one first year course ‘Earth in Crisis” also a course “Archaeology of the Landscape” just to complete my BA, and found his theories quite interesting. He mentioned how the sun and sun spots does affect the rainfall in some areas. And rainfall of course is most important to Australia, as we flip from flood to drought in some areas frequently. We have some differing regions from monsoonal up North, tropical and sub tropical, temperate to Alpine and of course desert in the middle of the continent. But this 500 level course is on sea level changes or palaeoclimate changes. He has researched the area on the South Coast of NSW and found sea levels were much higher than today by 50 – 100 feet 3,500 years ago. They have fluctuated over the centuries too. Should be interesting in a many aspect pertaining to climate change generally.

Tom Hobbes, you could read my articles on Svenmark’s work, “Extraterrestrial Climate Influence” (The Svensmark Hypothesis):
“Scientists have only recently come to suspect that cosmic rays have an important influence on Earth’s climate. Cosmic rays are highly energetic charged particles that originate from various sources in outer space.”
“Scientists have found a link between cosmic ray levels and thunderstorms. There is also a positive correlation between cosmic ray flux (CRF) and low-altitude cloud formation.”
“Ions created in the troposphere by cosmic rays could provide a mechanism for cloud formation.”
Do clouds disappear when cosmic rays get weaker? (Calder’s Updates, May 3, 2010):
“The Sun makes fantastic natural experiments” Henrik Svensmark says, “that allow us to test our ideas about its effects on the Earth’s climate”. Most dramatic are the events called Forbush decreases. Ejections of gas from the Sun, carrying magnetic fields, can suddenly cut the influx of cosmic rays coming to the Earth from exploded stars.

Tom Olsen on July 24, 2013 at 11:34 am
Exactly! If you have 0.3C in 15 years, conclude that you have 0C in the next 15, the warmies concentrate on refuting one interpretation: “the warming is over.” They blag on about “it’s the sun” “it’s the ocean” “it’s the volcanoes” etc.
The ALTERNATIVE is more devastating for them – “the trend is intact, but only half as steep as you thought.” Because half the steepness means
– AGW truly is self limiting as fossil reserves expire
– there are No positive feedbacks.
We’re then free to enjoy the plant enhancing and other benefits of CO2 with trivial temp consequences when warming dies cyclically return.

Bushbunny,
Thanks for pointer to Robert Baker’s work. How interesting that he is in the department of cognitive studies!
There have been some fascinating geological studies of variations in coastal sea levels over here in Western Australia, particularly the Geological Survey publication (for which I infuriatingly cannot find a reference right now) that included the study of sea level fall and coastal retreat at Port Kennedy, over the past 9,000 years, since the recent post-glacial Holocene Climate Optimum. This has been very accurately dated, using radiocarbon measurements of fossil wood in the successive coastal dune lines. If you Google-map search ‘Port Kennedy’, Western Australia you can see the area on the satellite image; it is marked Port Kennedy Science Park. Sea level has quite clearly been falling here for the past 9,000 years.
Other fascinating recent geological deposits along the West Australian coast include the very large rock slab mega-tsunami deposits up in the northwest of WA, documented and described by former head of the geological survey, Professor Philip Playford: http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/17798666/tsunami-finding-rocks-research/
Apparently there are also similar deposits on cliff tops along the NSW coastline in the Sydney area.
With regards,

taobabe, I think you started off on the right foot. I’ve never seen anyone get away with the P-word before! Plenty have wished to though, I’m sure. Keep asking those questions.. Cheers, LK

Do you remember how for years you were told by people that magical backerd’s radiation was uh gonna… boil your eyes out and prove you wrong about what you know of the migration of heat from one object to another?
Well, there’s a lot of posturing and stupidity going around regarding what the sun gives off: light,
and what the earth gives off: light.
They’re both the same thing and when you’re talking about light migrating from point to point of course you’re talking about photonic energy that either flies around, or it gets channeled when it’s entangled in the resonance spaces of an object’s electrons, in their orbitals. Nothing to see there, it’s well known it’s all the identical substance, and it’s also well known, there’s very little unusual, about the way it flows.
Remember how, for many years you’ve been seeing it told to you by all kinds of wackos, that the amount of light in the atmosphere is building up, and it’s infrared light, at the frequency the earth gives off?
And that it’s been proved there’s a connection with this light and the temperature of the earth?
Well, here’s what the practitioners of magic gas know, about light: a giant infrared light on, in the sky over everyone’s head, 24/7/365.25.
The American Meteorological Society: we’ve all heard of them:
A paper. Ah, what’s it say?
It says, “September 2011”. Ok.
It says “Volume 24 Issue 18, ok…
It says,
“Long-Term Trends in Downwelling Spectral Infrared Radiance over the U.S. Southern Great Plains”
by
“P. Jonathan Gero,
Space Science and Engineering Center,
University of Wisconsin, Madison, ”
and
“David D. Turner
NOAA/National Severe Storms Laboratory, Norman, Oklahoma,
and Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences,
University of Wisconsin, Madison”
Ok so they know kind of, how to read what Magic Gas is saying: it’s their very organization telling you, there’s radiation you don’t understand associated with climate, and that it’s rising.
Well guess what? These men laid out infrared detectors
checking on NOAA’s OWN STORY about there being a systematic connection to certain gases and infrared light.
They put out infrared downwelling energy detectors, for fourteen, count-em fourteen, years,
and when the fourteen years was up, while overall CO2 was rising, and man made CO2 was rising, guess what?
=====
The amount of earth frequency infrared light coming back out of the atmosphere, was less than when they started.
=====
This is the people telling you the original story: back radiation
checking their own story
and they discovered that across the southern Great Plains of North America, ground zero for the very foundational magic gas claims,
while the amount of man made CO2 increased and overall CO2 increased,
the amount of light they told you is in the atmosphere, because of CO2
was less than when they started checking, nearly fifteen years before,
using nearly three quarters of a million measurements.
=====
This is what those who believe in magic gas know, about photonic energy. They can’t even indicate to you, there’s a measurable component of light associated with their most fundamental and basic claim: that more gas, means more light: because that light is of itself the warmth being claimed to be generated by the presence of that gas.
There’s no escaping it. The paper’s firewalled of course but someone somewhere can get it.
Read what they say on the abstract here:
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2011JCLI4210.1?journalCode=clim
=====
That’s from the people telling you “This here’s real complicated. It’s so complicated you don’t even understand. Because you ain’t uh… scientist so yew just caint tale, awl about them heaters. They are some kind, of tricky. Boy, howdy. Lemme tale yew.”
That’s their story. This is so complicated, they keep being wrong, because you’re stupid.
On the other hand, there’s this guy:
His name I got from here on these pages as he tried to get in a word edgewise among all the talk of magical back and forth-isms that happen without cause, to make the 168 watt in, 324 watt out magic gas mirror in GHE not be magical.
His name is Nicola Scaffetta and he’s an Italian.
He’s not into the “it’s awl two complicated for yew to understand” bit you hear from people telling you about a giant heater in the sky nobody can measure, but you’re crazy not to believe in.
He linked to another of his own papers here one day and I went to his site because I recognize correct mathematics when I see it on a subject and saw he was no scammer on the take.
I went to his web page at the University or wherever and in pure, dart board type fashion, picked as the first (it turned out the only relevant and clear one about climate) of his presentations,
this:
“Solar Activity and Climate
Nicola Scafetta, ACRIM & Duke University
The climate oscillations: analysis, implications and their astronomical origin.”
=====
For those of you who tire of the endless repetitions of seeing magic gas believers miss which way yet another instrument is going to point,
this man’s presentation will be like lightening striking, to reveal the entire valley of climatology’s, utterly un-credible, zombies, unable to simply make the math, meet the markers.
You think magic gassers have any credibility at all? Any at all?
You’ll remember why everyone knows they don’t when you see this man explain the Sun’s effect on your globe.
His English is very bad. When he says “oscillations” it sounds like “isolations”.
When he says “induced” it sounds like “inn dew said”.
When he says a few other words it’s really hard to understand and you have to have a full vocabulary in your head of the subjects at hand to derive the proper word to fill the gaps but it’s not too hard if you’re grasping his premise.
Oh – the word “heliosphere” or whatever, regarding the Sun,
he pronounces, as Latinized, “AY-lee-ohs-fear.”
=====
I’d suggest you simply cut to the chase but you kind of need to get into the flow of his deal, but if you’ve got any questions, you just cut forward, to about 20:00 where he says “this…black…LINE.”
If you go there and see that and wonder if he developed it without fail or interruption during the previous twenty minutes, then go back to the beginning of it and watch what he says.
Turns out the whole thing’s very simple. The inside of the sun’s not solid, and so the very most energetic point inside the sun, migrates around within it: and when planets’ orbits align one way, or the other, the gravitational pull, moves the gravitational center of the sun, affecting the amount of energy coming from the sun to any point on the map so to speak, around it.
Very simple,
Very clear.
He should be asked to make his presentation for readers everywhere climate is analyzed.
Nicola Scafetta:

iframe=true&width=80%25&height=80%25