While many science related government agencies are shut down (NASA GISS is deemed ‘non-essential’ for example) some remain open due to statements like this:
Due to the Federal Government shutdown, NOAA.gov and most associated web sites are unavailable. However, because the information this site provides is necessary to protect life and property, it will be updated and maintained during the Federal Government shutdown.
The NOAA Space Weather Prediction Center remains open, and they’ve updated their solar cycle progression graph set. Today, as we watch the sun we find only two small sunspot groups, both rather anemic.
![latest_512_4500[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/latest_512_45001.jpg?quality=83)
The latest data is not encouraging for Solar Cycle 24 as the SSN numbers have taken a pretty big hit. In fact, all the solar metrics have taken a hit at a time near the peak when their should be many more sunspots and indications of an active solar dynamo.
The SSN numbers for September dropped to about 37:
Radio flux is also down:
And the Ap Index, an indicator of solar magnetic activity is still bumping along the bottom. Compare it to the peaks seen in Solar Cycle 23 in 2004:
Clearly, we’ve passed solar max, as this magnetic field chart showing the magnetic filed has reversed (a signature of solar max) shows:
Solar Polar Fields – Mt. Wilson and Wilcox Combined -1966 to Present
From Dr. Leif Svalgaard – Click the pic to view at source
It seems that even though the solar magnetic field has flipped, predictions of associated climate doom have not come to pass.
Date: 07/10/13
Sun’s magnetic field about to flip, could affect Earth’s climate
The Sun’s magnetic field is soon going to flip by 180-degrees which could lead to changes in climate, storms and even disrupt satellites, scientists have warned. The Sun’s magnetic field changes polarity approximately every 11 years. It happens at the peak of each solar cycle as the Sun’s inner magnetic dynamo re-organises itself.
http://www.thegwpf.org/suns-magnetic-field-flip-affect-earths-climate/
Rather than an active flip, it’s more like the sun is rolling over and playing dead.
More at the WUWT Solar reference page
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/08/a_tale_of_two_climate_hockeysticks.html
What I sent above exposes the false charts of temperatures for the past 1000 years that have been sent over this web-site.
Tim ,Leif will say,show, refute anything to try to prove all his wrong assumptions.
Salvatore Del Prete says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:04 am
https://www.google.com/#q=a+graph+of+temperatures+for+last+1000+years
The temp. graph in this article is an accurate picture of the true temp. changes that have taken place over the last 1000 years.
————————————————————–
This is the second time the provided link led to a page of search results, not a single article. This is not useful.
The first one you posted did lead to an article here, the second result on that page
:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_past_1000_years
It appears to be a highly biased account of those temperatures and supports the now debunked hockey stick and pooh poohs the skeptics. It does not have a graph, just propaganda. It seems like it was edited by that guy who got banned from being able to edit climate change articles.
Tim Walker says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:51 pm
TSI: Total Solar Irradiance as measured as Solar energy per unit time over a unit area perpendicular to the Sun’s rays at the top of Earth’s atmosphere. Thanks for the laugh.
In talking about solar activity the ‘Total’ in TSI is best viewed over an area with unit 4pi, i.e. a sphere surrounding the Sun with radius 1 AU.
If you wish to stick to your ‘definition’ then TSI varies 6.6% over a year as the distance from the sun to the ‘top of Earth’s atmosphere’. This is the TSI that is important for the climate, but is not the TSI people usually talk about. So the joke is a bit on you. However, I don’t laugh at other people.
Salvatore, I like Leif’s site and much of his educational comments, but I do agree about how he chooses to discuss things. There are times he can be very annoying. I also have to admit that at least some of your comments are not far from how he described them. You need to learn how to better provide links instead of using google searches. Good luck with your research. I’m grateful that other perspectives are being looked at.
Okay, I will admit there are five sunspot groups on this side of the sun today – but only two of them are really substantial, so Anthony is correct enough. One is on each side of the solar limbs, waaay over to each side, and one way below the two obvious ones looks like somebody got a booger on the display, and not even a very impressive one.
I find it amusing that posters are now plucking up courage and expressing doubts about some things Dr Lsvalgaard has said as evidenced on posts above. As others have said many times,be respectful towards others points of view when you are acknowledged as the guru at the top of the tree because when you reveal that you are human like everybody else and make mistakes, you will be politely (not arrogantly) reminded! PS. I am a biotechnologist (a doctor also) so cannot refute Dr Lsvalgaard in his field, but I can hold my own against the Lsvalgaards in my field (I had to post this because I am fed up with the good Doctors apparent disrespect for anybody who does not agree with him).
Thanks Tim. The way I see it this prolonged solar minimum is going to clear up much of what is being discussed on this board. I say within the next year or two.
James Fosser says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:05 pm
I am fed up with the good Doctors apparent disrespect for anybody who does not agree with him).
Respect has to be earned. Do that and you get my respect. Spout nonsense or wishful thinking and you don’t get any.
Would you say that your comment earned respect?
Leif made some predictions about solar flux and ap index for the rest of this year. So far way off, but the year is not over and I will post those predictions made Aug. 06 2013 right or wrong when the year is over.
Leif you will be held acountable for everything you say from a scientific perspective, right or wrong.
Another example will be the IMF floor. We will see if 4.0 nt holds or not going forward, and future evidence to support or not support a floor of 2.0 nt during the Maunder Minimum.
Eample two, we will see the climate reaction to prolonged solar conditions.
Leif’s temperature graphs are fabrications putting it politely.
Leif blows more smoke about TSI. He provides another joke.
He says: that in talking about TSI, he is talking about the solar activity. Wow, someone had a way of measuring total solar activity. At least that is what he is implying. He says that is the TSI people usually talk about. Where is that data shown? All the TSI graphs I’ve seen are of the total amount of Solar energy as I talked about above. Infact in another post Leif explained part of the fluctuation in TSI was because of Earth’s orbit. and in the post above he explained fluctuation in TSI is because of the variance in energy coming from the different parts of the Sun. Lief you really like to ignore other people’s facts if they interfere with your argument.
About laughing at other people: too bad you don’t enjoy comedians or clowns. You did say you don’t laugh at other people. I can see though how you would be irritated by the idea or the nerve of someone getting a laugh about what you say. Me, I can even enjoy when the joke is on me. For example: I’ll laugh later for wasting time discussing this with you. I could of just as well discussed this with a hot air balloon. The same result, except ….
Tim Walker says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:02 pm
Salvatore, I like Leif’s site and much of his educational comments, but I do agree about how he chooses to discuss things. There are times he can be very annoying. I also have to admit that at least some of your comments are not far from how he described them. You need to learn how to better provide links instead of using google searches. Good luck with your research. I’m grateful that other perspectives are being looked at.
———————————————————-
Tim, there are times when you are very annoyed. I am not annoyed with Leif when I disagree or am puzzled by what he says. The fact that you are annoyed and I am not means that it isn’t him who is annoying, but you who are annoyed. If he were truly annoying, then I would have been annoyed too. He doesn’t have the power to annoy me, I do. So when I am annoyed by something, it is my choice to be annoyed, not their power to annoy. Don’t play victim. Own the fact that you choose to be annoyed when you read Leif’s stuff. Don’t get annoyed, refute it if you can, but please don’t blame Leif for your choosing to be annoyed. He can’t protect you from yourself.
I am thinking which upcoming month will have the first blank day. By the end of the year? yes or no.
Thank you for your comment James Fosser. I’m just a bit fed up with his disrespect toward others also, but it does paint quite an interesting picture of his ego.
My solar parameter averages theory:
My average solar parameter theory states if these solar parameter averages are attained folllowing several years of sub-solar activity in general the temperature trend is going to be down.Sub solar activity in general started in year 2005.
THEY ARE:
Solar flux avg. sub 90.
Solar wind speed avg. sub 350 km/sec.
Ap index avg. sub 5.0 some spikes the other 1% of the time.
Cosmic ray count per min. north of 6500.
E 10.7 flux 0-105NM avg. sub 100.
Solar irradiance avg. off .015% or more.
IMF field 4.0 nt avg or lower
.
OTHER ITEMS AND SECONDARY EFFECTS
1.Weakening geomagnetic field which will compond solar effects.
2. This following several years of sub-solar activity in general which started in earnest during year 2005.
Some Secondary effects:
A more meridional atmospheric circulation due to ozone distribution changes in the stratosphere due to very low EUV light values. In turn a more meridional atmospheric circulation will result in more clouds, precip., and snow cover for the N.H. Colder temperatures ,increase in albedo.
Low solar wind will result in an increase in galactic cosmic rays (also have to take into account the strength of earth’s magnetic field, which when weak will compound solar effects) which will result in an increase in clouds ,lower temperatures.
Weak solar irradiance will result in weaker amounts of visible light penetrating the ocen surface ,result will be lower ocean heat content.
Low ap index with spikes will promote more volcanic activity as will an increase in galactic cosmic rays ,many studies have shown. Mr. Casey of the Space and Science Center has research in support of this.
An increase in volcanic activity if high latitude will contribute to warming the stratosphere in the higher latitudes resulting in a more meridional atmospheric circulation pattern, while at the same time cool the surface of the earth due to so2 particles reflecting incoming sunlight.
Some speculate that the cold phase of the PDO( more la ninas ,less el ninos) is tied into prolonged solar activity ,due to rotational changes in the earth ,due to an increase in gelogical activity.
That is my basic take, easily falsified if the solar parameters I said are reached and the climate does not show a decline in the temperature trend.
Maunder Minimum, and Dalton Minimum lend support to the above.
.
Maunder Minimum 1650-1700 Dalton Minimum 1790-1820.
…
Thank you Jeff Mitchell for a great post. You are right. A deep breathe and I’ll try to take responsibility for what I can truly deal with, myself. You made me laugh at myself.
Steven Mosher says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:42 pm
……….
Thanks for the link I shall look at it.
The existence of a meteorological response in the polar regions to fluctuations in the dawn–dusk component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), By, is well established and is known as the ‘Mansurov effect’.
I think that needs correcting to: ‘Svalgaard-Mansurov’ effect which I think is defined as the polar cap magnetic deflections, associated with ionospheric currents flow resulting from the release of magnetic tension on newly open magnetic field lines.
On the other hand as much as I disagree with Leif, I still have learned much from him. He knows much, but wants to be correct all the time on everything, and if one should disagree he will do everything in his power to try to show that person does not know what he/she is talking about. That is the problem as I see it.
He is smart, but won’t give anyone else much of any credit that has a different view from his view.
vukcevic says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:32 pm
“The existence of a meteorological response in the polar regions to fluctuations in the dawn–dusk component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), By, is well established and is known as the ‘Mansurov effect’.”
I think that needs correcting to: ‘Svalgaard-Mansurov’ effect which I think is defined as the polar cap magnetic deflections, associated with ionospheric currents
The Mansurov effect is correct as it is about ‘ a meteorological response’ which Mansurov thought he has discovered: “Mansurov S M, Mansurova L G, Mansurov G S, Mikhnevich V V and Visotsky A M 1974 North–south asymmetry of geomagnetic and tropospheric events”
The Svalgaard-Mansurov Effect is a real [and different] effect that takes place in the ionosphere and the magnetosphere.
Lefi what happens in what part of the atmosphere does impact other parts of the atmosphere because the atmosphere is all interconnected, regardless of density .
Great reading, and fun.
Mods please
‘Salvatore Del Prete says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:20 pm
Leif’s temperature graphs are fabrications putting it politely.”
Accusing Leif of telling lies is beyond the pale. If somebody has an issue with his charts let them do as Anthony and McIntyre have done and dig into to the data to show folks why.