Dr. Sam Outcalt : Emeritus Professor of Physical Geography, University of Michigan writes in with an analysis of the recently revised TSI Data from the University of Colorado as mentioned on WUWT here. He notes that elements of his analysis align with some notable changes in global temperature.
===========================================================
Hi Anthony:
I did a Hurst ReScaling of the Revised TSI Data from the University of Colorado.
I used only the 1960-2013 portion of the record with the mean subtracted.
The integral curve shows a minimum in 1977 near the base of the hockey stick and the start of the Modern Warm Regime in NOAA, GISS and Hadley data.
The convex inflection in 1998 appears to mark the end of the Modern Warm Regime.
The maximum of the integral trace in 2004 appears to indicate the onset of a new cooling regime.
These solar events are synchronous with the major events in the earth’s thermal history.
I did a similar analysis of the Ap Index for you some time ago but as I recall it didn’t display the strong link with Global Climate Change as does the TSI.
Best Wishes
Samuel I Outcalt
=============================================================
From that analysis on WUWT here
Dr. Sam Outcalt shows his application of Hurst Rescaling to the Ap Solar Magnetic Index data. Using that method, he has independently identified the “step function switch off” I reported in Feb 2008:
The major regime transition is at the maximum of the integral at 2005.71, which corresponds to October 2005, the same date I identified.
Clearly the sun entered into a magnetic funk then, and has yet to come out of it.
We live in interesting times.
For more on Hurst ReScaling, see this paper: SIO_HurstReScale
Time will tell. I don’t see any big change, but what do I know?
“Applying a little logic it must be the case that at a certain level of TSI (even if TSI is merely a proxy for other solar influences such as UV variations) the global temperature budget will be balanced i.e. neither warming nor cooling. During the 400 years since the world experienced the relatively low TSI levels of the 1600’s that point of balance must have been crossed and re crossed many times as the TSI numbers varied with time. That is why the world has experienced warming and cooling spells regularly over the centuries (though with an average warming trend since 1601)
As it happens the chart shown (in the linked article below) covers TSI from the depths of the Little Ice age to the recent warm spell so it is clear that the point of transition from net cooling to net warming is somewhere within the range 1363 to 1367 Watts per square metre. Indeed on the basis of just a brief glance at the chart that point of transition is obviously lower than the average TSI between 1961 and 2001 hence my assertion that during those years there was a steady solar warming effect which adequately explains the observed warming without reliance on rising CO2. This is such a simple and obvious point that I really do not understand why the IPCC and the modellers did not see it.
The information that we need and which is critical to the whole global warming debate is some idea of the level of TSI at which the Earth switches from net warming to net cooling. It will be hard to identify because, as I have mentioned in my other articles, the filtering of the solar signal through the various oceanic cycles is neither rapid nor straightforward.”
from here:
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=1396&linkbox=true&position=1
June 4th 2008
I’m expecting to hear from Leif on this issue very soon but would aver that most likely it is not simple TSI that has the effect but rather particle and wavelength variations affecting the ozone creation / destruction balance above the tropopause.
Furthermore, I think that it is unlikely to be GCRs as per Svensmark or magnetic field strength as per many others.
Sorry but I don’t think this study has merit. Whether the integral goes up or down depends on where you put the average that you substract from the data, so it is an important value. But we cannot be sure that the average of the last 60 years in particular has any physical significance. We don’t know if it represents the real average status of these solar variables. Other 60 year periods would offer different average values to substract, based on which the integrals would have looked different.
“This is such a simple and obvious point that I really do not understand why the IPCC and the modellers did not see it.” Steven
If it is not caused by man and curable through considerable wealth transfers from the productive to the political class then it is not worthy of inclusion in IPCC reports. They might well have seen it and rejected it. I believe this is the case for historical measurements of CO2 levels other than ice cores, which show concentrations exceeding 400 PPM over a century ago.
Nylo says: @ur momisugly February 12, 2014 at 3:57 am
…Whether the integral goes up or down depends on where you put the average that you substract from the data,…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It is ALL relative.
Taking it that the Earth does adjust it’s temperature based on the amount of energy accumulated. (and the oceans do accumulate energy) What this is telling you is given the early 20th C temperature are we net accumulating energy or losing energy and therefore is the temperature in response going to increase or decrease.
http://www.sciencebits.com/calorimeter
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/06/more-evidence-that-global-warming-is-a-false-alarm-a-model-simulation-of-the-last-40-years-of-deep-ocean-warming/
Simply…
I rest my case and all science relating to “climate”…
I’m sure Leif will have something yo say about this.
Guy says: @ur momisugly February 12, 2014 at 4:35 am
…. I believe this is the case for historical measurements of CO2 levels other than ice cores, which show concentrations exceeding 400 PPM over a century ago.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Also shown in Ice Cores before history was re-written.
Steven Goddard is one of the scientists who was sidelined in the climate scammers’ takeover by non scientists, of scientific reporting on climate.
He recently did a subtraction of all the NASA/NOAA doctored data for the United States,
from the raw data, and showed the United States’ raw data, hasn’t warmed since eighteen ninety, (1890)
The raw data is placed unaltered online by law.
stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/01/19/just-hit-the-noaa-motherlode/
Ouch – so much for warming regimes.
kramer says:
February 12, 2014 at 4:45 am
I’m sure Leif will have something to say about this.
I consider this kind of paper to be voodoo cyclomania, so count me out.
REPLY: It’s not a paper, its an email posing a question. The question is; “can the TSI data be linked to global temperature”? Like you, I think not, but I’m always willing to ask the question again with new data and analysis.
I note you said pretty much the same thing about the Ap index too, yet here we are with it still bumping along the bottom in this new regime.- Anthony
To call and end to the modern warm period on 22.5 years of data seems a little premature. The last graph could be evidence of cooling starting in 2005 but not an end.
For those who insist that “Correlation does not mean causation,” let’s stipulate that the sun may not necessarily come up tomorrow. It’s just that it’s happened so many times before.
When the Soviet Union fell the professional warmer grant scammers tacked .5 onto the world temperature because 5,000 of the world’s most cold stations vanished in a period of about six weeks: actually it was in one month, and actually, when the Soviet climate recording system fell, it was like one day before their pay day in Russia and many of the people keeping the data in Russia, had to get paid, in order to send the information in.
So it was said and you’ll see it occasionally written of that era that ”5,000 stations vanished overnight.”
The people who were trying to stop the wrecking of the US data and the World data too, complained bitterly and the Warmer grant scammers took off two tenths claiming it was ‘time for needed adjustments.’
The last century wasn’t even actually all that warm; in fact one of the prime legacies of the Mann-Hansen destruction of science era, turning atmospheric energy sciences into circuses of non scientific political activists and media hacks trying to horn in on the alarmism debate trough,
and wrecking entire GLOBAL data repositories,
is the willful deliberate protracted alteration of entire database systems in order to make times before seem colder than they were, and much flatter: less dynamic so they could blow the alarmism horn to create their own persona and then widespread feeding frenzy of grant funds and escape with their own amid the turmoil
Just looking at the first graph, I think it is significant, but incomplete. When you write “The maximum of the integral trace in 2004 appears to indicate the onset of a new cooling regime”, I believe that will only be truly indicated when the next peak in the series of increasing maximums is complete, and it shows a significantly lower peak than before, thus indicating a real break with the previous trend.
Now that may happen, indeed I believe it is likely to happen, but it will be 2 or 3 years still until we can say that it HAS happened, with certainty.
Well, I knew we had turned down (to negative) from zero warming around 1998
so this is nothing new to me.
The question is: is the world ready for 2 [or] 3 decades of cooling coming up?
I doubt it. I sure could use some help in trying the warn the world about this.
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2013/04/29/the-climate-is-changing/
lsvalgaard says:
February 12, 2014 at 5:09 am
REPLY: It’s not a paper, its an email posing a question.
It linked to a paper. My comment was about that paper which presumably is the basis for the question.
you said pretty much the same thing about the Ap index too, yet here we are with it still bumping along the bottom in this new regime
I don’t think there is a new regime. Ap is low because solar activity is low. This has happened many times in the past: http://www.leif.org/research/Ap-1844-now.png
Imagine you are in the 50th year of the Little Ice Age; all the data “projects” that the Northern Hemisphere will experience a new Ice Age . Based on the historical record it is totally clear that massive ice sheets a mile thick will INEVITABLY reoccur .
The scientific ” consensus” demands that governments begin relocating people, farms, industry, etc., to more southern regions . The government spends ( steals) taxpayer money to begin a Relocation “Marshall” Plan to execute this “emergency” program . “Climate scientists,” Al Gore, the IPCC folks all fly – in their private jets – to Monaco to coordinate the world efforts .
Now, Imagine you are in the 50th year of the Medieval Warm Period; all the data project ………….
The above idiocy and stupidity is no different , conceptually, than what we are all witnessing today. Science will rue the day that they remained silent in the face of the greatest scientific fraud in the history of the world. As the pseudo-climate scientists scream out – in the manner of Joseph Goebbels- their massive scam, the “serious” scientific organizations wilted, remained silent, and REFUSED to speak out against the AGW willing executioners.
One can massage, manipulate, analyze the data any damn way you wish to produce your desired results. But history has demonstrated , and STILL DEMONSTRATES, that much remains unknown about the drivers of the earth’s climate, and that the climate is never static. It always changes. And no statistical analysis of extant data can predict ( not yet, anyway) when the climate will turn .
The majority of scientists are a sad sack bunch of money grubbing , greedy scum bags for abandoning their principles.
The Modern Warm Regime is starting to end, although, for instance, so far this year 2014’s cosmic ray count (oulu.fi) is only 0.8% different yet from the overall multi-decade average since that example neutron monitor began readings in 1964, being 6193.12 versus a 6145.34 average count rate. For being presently in a maximum, this cycle’s maximum is weak, relatively weaker by a greater percentage than that compared to prior recent maximums. But the more interesting time will be after entering the subsequent minimum later this decade. Both C-14, Be-10, and other data suggest a number of times greater past variation has occurred, in terms of how much more Little Ice Age Maunder Minimum levels would differ.
“These solar events are synchronous with the major events in the earth’s thermal history.”
This article doesn’t itself show what would illustrate such, but it could be best read in the context of http://img213.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=62356_expanded_overview3_122_1094lo.jpg
Reblogged this on The Next Grand Minimum and commented:
Only time will tell, but this may be another indicator that we are entering the next grand minimum.
This is from around 1992, but maybe it wasn’t “heard” by the data adjusters until later (keep watch at around 1:40 in….)…
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMWn2oDAUVc%5D
“Like you, I think not, but I’m always willing to ask the question again with new data and analysis.”
How refreshing.
How does the author know that 2004 was the maximum? Is there something in the numbers I’m not seeing?
John Tyler says: @ur momisugly February 12, 2014 at 6:36 am
….Science will rue the day that they remained silent in the face of the greatest scientific fraud in the history of the world. As the pseudo-climate scientists scream out – in the manner of Joseph Goebbels- their massive scam, the “serious” scientific organizations wilted, remained silent, and REFUSED to speak out against the AGW willing executioners…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
“the “serious” scientific organizations wilted, remained silent No the scientific organizations did not stay silent as they should have (if this was a true scientific debate) Instead they LOUDLY jumped on the bandwagon proclaiming Global Warming is Real!
The American Chemical Society with this article in Chem & Eng News, prompted me to drop my membership after almost forty years as a member:
Other supposed ‘scientific’ organizations have done just the same.
As far as I am concerned they should all be defunded and disband. When psydo-scientific organizations start supporting a RELIGION it is time to implement the separation of Church and State and that goes for most of Academia too!
It is always difficult to correlate one item when multiple items are in play. We can see a correlation of the PDO with global temperature trends all the way back to 1850 in HadCrut4. It could be the solar variations sometimes enhance and sometimes reduce the amplitude of the PDO phases. This makes a lot of physical sense since much of the solar energy goes directly into the oceans. What would be nice is to show the combined effect of this solar data with the PDO data. Here’s an approximate view of the PDO back to 1850.
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/to/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1880/to:1912/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1912/to:1944/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1944/to:1976/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1976/to:2005/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2005/to/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1850/to:1880/trend
Gail Combs says:
February 12, 2014 at 4:42 am
One would think that a good answer awaits the simultaneous solution of a battery of differential equations for respective fluences of TSI, Albedo, Ocean and Air circulation, Thermal Evolution, etc.
My B+ in DiffEq being the zenith of my math pedagogy I recall that only a comparatively small number of problems submit to evaluation, permit a suitable equation to be found.
Regarding thermal evolution, during heating evolution relates to the 5th power of the temperature, otherwise to the 4th power. The emissivity of water is only 60% that of leaves and dirt. OTOH the blanket effect of greenhouse gases is negligible as the IR is absorbed as molecular bond vibrational energy which kinetic energy is immediately shared in collisions with the surrounding predominant gases of the Atmosphere.