The NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center has updated their monthly graph set and it is becoming even more clear that we are past solar max, and that solar max has been a dud. “The slump” continues not only in sunspot activity, but also other metrics. And, tellingly, Dr. David Hathaway has now aligned his once way too high solar prediction with that of WUWT’s resident solar expert, Dr. Leif Svalgaard. Of course, at this point, I’m not sure “prediction” is the right word for Hathaway’s update.
The SSN count remains low:
Note the divergence between the model prediction in red, and the actual values.
The 10.7cm radio flux continues slumpy:
The Ap geomagnetic index remains low, unchanged, and indicates a tepid solar magnetic dynamo. We’ve had well over 6 years now (and about to be seven) of a lower than expected Ap index.
From the WUWT Solar reference page, Dr Leif Svalgaard has this plot comparing the current cycle 24 with recent solar cycles. The prediction is that solar max via sunspot count will peak in late 2013/early 2014:
But, another important indicator, Solar Polar Fields from Mt. Wilson and Wilcox Combined -1966 to Present show that the fields have flipped (crossed the zero line) indicating solar max has indeed happened.
Image from Dr. Leif Svalgaard – Click the pic to view at source.
In other news, Dr. David Hathaway has updated his prediction page on 9/5/13, and suggests solar max may have already occurred. He says:
The current prediction for Sunspot Cycle 24 gives a smoothed sunspot number maximum of about 66 in the Summer of 2013. The smoothed sunspot number has already reached 67 (in February 2012) due to the strong peak in late 2011 so the official maximum will be at least this high. The smoothed sunspot number has been flat over the last four months. We are currently over four years into Cycle 24. The current predicted and observed size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle since Cycle 14 which had a maximum of 64.2 in February of 1906.
![ssn_predict_l[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/ssn_predict_l1.gif)
You can watch this video that shows 5 years of cycle 24 predictions from Hathaway, as they shrink from 2005 to 2010. Solar cycle 24 predictions were higher then, and exceeded the SSN max for cycle 23.
Dr. Svalgaard’s prediction in 2005 (with Lund) was for a solar cycle 24 max SSN of 75, and was totally against the consensus for solar cycle 24 predictions of the time. It looks like that might not even be reached. From his briefing then:
Source: http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Prediction%20Lund.pdf
We live in interesting times.
More at the WUWT Solar reference page.
Leif Svalgaard says:
It has actually not cooled either.
===============
ROTFL….how would anyone know
Lief
When you say no cooling you also have to say over what period and using what data set. Also see
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/09/are-we-in-a-pause-or-a-decline-now-includes-at-least-april-data/
herkimer says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:16 pm
When you say no cooling you also have to say over what period and using what data set.
So should everybody, but nobody does. The point is that with real, significant cooling or warming those details are not important. If they are, the effect is no significant.
John Whitman says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:35 pm
Steven Mosher on September 13, 2013 at 12:00 pm
I see that nobody is up to the challenge
– – – – – – – –
Steven Mosher,
Great idea. But nothing is free, n’est ce pas?
Please offer some direct funding (in cash only please) to perform your challenge. I recommend you send a draft agreement / contract to all WUWT bloggers. That might stimulate interest in your challenge. Isn’t capitalism wonderful?
: )
########################
Funding?
For what? the data is free, I’ll write the code for Free.
All people need to do is take a stand
IF you think the sun controls the ups and downs of the climate, then make a prediction
what will happen to temperature ?
what will happen to cloud cover?
How much funding do these guys need to explain right here what their prediction is?
Leif, using the met-office historical Temperature record and Sunspot data from Greenwich Observatory, I have graphed both for three different locations, looking at the trends I can clearly see a relationship between solar activity and temperature, am I doing something wrong?
Sunspot data from Greenwich Observatory. Temperature record from Oxford
http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/oxford-average-november-sunspot-number-and-march-minimum-temperature-1865-2012.gif
Sunspot data from Greenwich Observatory. Temperature record from Stornoway airport
http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/stornoway-nov-ssn-v-mar-tmin-1875-2012.gif
Average November Sunspot Number and February Minimum Temperature 1875-2012
http://thetempestspark.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/nov-ssn-v-feb-tmin-1875-20121.gif
Sparks says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:38 pm
Leif, using the met-office historical Temperature record and Sunspot data from Greenwich Observatory, I have graphed both for three different locations, looking at the trends
If you are looking for trends, you will find them. As Yogi Berra said: “if I hadn’t believed it, I wouldn’t have seen it”.
– – – – – – –
Steven Mosher,
If you want somebody to do something (your challenge) then pay them for it.
To your thinking your funding offer may be too small. But OK. Send us your funding offer.
A future patron of fine skeptical challenges. It does kind of fit with your blog personage.
John
herkimer says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:40 pm
No cooling ? it depends on whose data you use.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:01 pmAnd from when you start. Try year 2000.
All in the name of friendly banter …. let’s try 10,000 bp. :-0
I only chose 2002 because of the often cited “warmest decade” comment made by some in the media. So, while indeed, the last decade may have been the warmest on record, at least according to the wildly adjusted land based metrics …. the trend within that decade is slightly, though not significantly down. 🙂 (UAH excepted)
Dr. Deanster says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:12 pm
according to the wildly adjusted land based metrics …. the trend within that decade is slightly, though not significantly down. 🙂 (UAH excepted)
Perhaps you trust the wildly adjusted land based metrics more than the satellite based data? Fair enough, everybody has his own bias.
Steve, please set the record straight. Were you an English major of some kind? Just checking to make sure it’s you here and that no-one hijacked your handle.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:43 pm
If you are looking for trends, you will find them. As Yogi Berra said: “if I hadn’t believed it, I wouldn’t have seen it”.
All the same, the trend is there in three different temperature records, from three different locations, over a lengthy time period.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 13, 2013 at 6:35 am
“…The number of CMEs in this cycle [24] is actually a bit higher than in the previous cycle [23] even with the sunspot number being only half of what it was at the previous maximum.”
So if the number of Earth directed flares is higher than 23 why is the AP index so low? Could it be the weaker solar magnetic field and the L&P effect are reducing the strength of flares and CME’s or were Earth facing flares during SC23 also anomalously low and or weaker?
Sparks says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:21 pm
All the same, the trend is there in three different temperature records, from three different locations, over a lengthy time period.
First: eye-balling is a poor way to determine trends, second: extend the time period back in time and the ‘trend’ is different.
Tenuc says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:21 pm
So if the number of Earth directed flares is higher than 23 why is the AP index so low?
First: the data on CMEs count them all. I have not seen a specific study of ‘halo’ CMEs [Earth directed] so perhaps it is just you impression. If you have hard data, I would like to see them.
Could it be the weaker solar magnetic field
The solar magnetic field [and the part of it dragged into interplanetary space] is indeed a bit lower:
http://www.leif.org/research/HMF-B-1963-now.png
Finding the footprint of solar forcing will be as difficult as finding the footprint of GHG forcing. We’re in the cool phase of the PDO for 10 or 15 more years which most everyone agrees forces some amount of cooling. CO2 emissions and levels are increasing which most everyone agrees forces some amount of warming. Solar forcing? Are these the big two or the big three or are there other forcings that are significant? I hate to get stereotyped as a merchant of doubt, but how do you ever isolate the forcing variables in climate change? Maybe over several PDO cycles and solar cycles we’ll be able to infer and agree on the power of individual forcings, but it won’t be easy. Right now I’d guess that the cooling from PDO and warming from CO2 are a wash. If we had significant cooling during the positive phase of the PDO, then I’d be inclined to attribute most of that to solar or unknowns. If we had significant warming during the positive phase of the PDO, I’d be inclined to attribute that to CO2 and PDO and unknowns. If we had neither warming nor cooling, I’d leap from my grave and curse the perversity of it all, and the climate wars would continue with knowers knowing nothing, but claiming clarity and confidence levels of 99% (yes- hyperbole and alliteration)!
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:34 pm
extend the time period back in time and the ‘trend’ is different
yep, look out below…….
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/09/hockey-stick-observed-in-noaa-ice-core-data/
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:34 pm
First: eye-balling is a poor way to determine trends, second: extend the time period back in time and the ‘trend’ is different.
Leif, it is simple, there are two trend lines, one for solar and one for temperature and they closely match, I’m aware of the issues you have mentioned, as a visual aide for the purpose of showing you the data, graphs are what people use.
If you have temperature data of the same latitude as the UK I’ll be happy to produce a graph and supply you the data for further analysis.
C. de Jager, Solar Forcing of Climate :
“The role of the open solar flux has so far been grossly underestimated in discussions of Sun-climate relations.“
See abstract in the above link.
It was prof. de Jager who triggered my interest in the topic of whether or not there was a direct relation between the sun’s activity and the climate. Don’t ask me for specifics, I am an amateur here, but he presented data showing such a relation. It was in the news in Holland several years ago. I guess it is still somewhere on his site (see link above).
I don’t read WUWT every day, so I miss a lot, but anyhow, I don’t remember having read about or from De Jager on WUWT and also not about “open solar flux”.
So I thought I give him a citation here.
The link in my post should direct to here:
http://www.cdejager.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/2012-deJager-solar-forcing2.pdf
So I read Leifs PDF on the telescopes used and I wonder, does the moon actually have a blocking effect? What effect does solar eclipses have during maximum activity as opposed to minimum activity?
Idakno, just typing out loud.
Leif Svalgaard says:
September 13, 2013 at 9:38 am
Ah, that makes perfect sense. Many thanks.
w.
Steven Mosher says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:21 am
Actual science? How daring. Now you’ll get lots of folks claiming a thousand reasons that they can’t do it or its not worth doing or the results will be nullified by the atmospheric pressure or the humidity and the like …
Me, I think “it’s the thermometer, stupid”, so I have no prediction at all about which way the frog will jump … except that it won’t jump far.
w.
Just wait until the solar activity increases again, proving that warming is driven by increasing carbon!
Blade says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:20 pm
===========
Care to bore us with your educational/work experience ?
Steven Mosher says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:21 am
Anyone who has a working theory of how the sun effects the climate should be able to make TESTABLE predictions about the next 5 to 10 years.
================
That doesn’t follow. For example, I propose the hypothesis that the sun’s influence on climate is a chaotic fractal at all time scales. The TEST of this is that no one will be able to accurately predict the effect of the sun on climate using existing mathematical theory.
Well, I’ve been saying the globe is cooling for six or seven years, now, haven’t got sick once.
=====================